Skip to main content
R
Rockshead
Participating Frequently
May 22, 2012
Question

sRGB or Blurb icc profile better for soft proofing prior to Book module?

  • May 22, 2012
  • 3 replies
  • 26355 views

As I understand it images destined for Blurb are converted by the Lr engine into sRGB behind the scenes. To achieve best chance of colour accuracy in the finished Blurb book, is it better to softproof using a sRGB profile or the icc profile* offered on the Blurb Support website. On the surface this icc profile is recommended (by them) for their Booksmart process. Anyone know if that is similar to the Lr Book module process? There is no mention of Lr anywhere on the Blurb color management pages.

It would be great to pin down the answer to this. I cannot find any recommendation for best work practice aimed at getting good colour reproduction in these books; and trial and error, whilst acceptable in making inkjet prints, is a very expensive route when applied to printing a Blurb book.

* And even then, as far as I can see, there is no method for differentiating between the Blurb papers. It is just one profile to fit all.

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    3 replies

    D Fosse
    Community Expert
    D FosseCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    February 7, 2014

    And just to add that proofing to sRGB is generally a waste of time unless you have a wide gamut monitor. If not, what you see on-screen is already soft proofed to sRGB (or something so close to it that the difference doesn't matter).

    If sRGB really was your target, just look at the screen.

    Todd Shaner
    Todd Shaner
    Legend
    February 7, 2014

    Blurb suggests submitting books with sRGB profile images if not using PS or InDesign. The problem is that the smaller gamut Blurb.icc CMYK profile falls outside the sRGB color space in certain parts of the Yelllow, Green, and Blue spectrum, which effectively clips these colors when sending sRGB profiled images. How badly this affects the color in your images depends on the amount of area that actually falls into these clipped areas. But even with significant out of gamut areas the image may still look quite acceptable.

    It has already been established that a single profile (i.e. Blurb.icc) cannot represent the actual gamut of all the paper types Blurb offers, but using it should theoretically get more of your image into the actual printable color gamut. I use InDesign with the Blurb plugin and ProPhoto RGB workspace, which is converted to the Blurb.icc CMYK profile during PDF export. I haven't found it necessary to "correct" images based on soft-proof preview using the Blurb.icc profile and the printed book images have been remarkable close to what I see on my calibrated sRGB gamut monitor. Unfortunately I haven't used the LR Book module to compare the results using sRGB images, but I'm guessing it would be very close.

    I suggest printing a small test book with a sampling of the wedding images to determine what adjustments (if any) may be required. The best advice I can offer is to  establish good White and Black clipping points. Also use the Highlights and Shadows controls to help reveal fine detail in those areas, which otherwise may be lost in the printed copy.

    TheDigitalDog
    TheDigitalDog
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2014

    trshaner wrote:

    The problem is that the smaller gamut Blurb.icc CMYK profile falls outside the sRGB color space in certain parts of the Yelllow, Green, and Blue spectrum, which effectively clips these colors when sending sRGB profiled images.

    The real problem is that's a bogus profile! It doesn't define their output. It's a generic CMYK profile based on GRACoL 2006, and further, we're expected to believe it's based on all the papers one can select? Again, unless one is supplied the actual ICC profile used to convert the RGB data, soft proofing and attempting to evaluate the output with a bogus profile is, well bogus <g>.

    I've measured all the papers Blurb provides, just the papers alone are not even close to GRACol 2006. In fact, the deltaE differences in just the two most different papers are nearly dE4! So you have a profile supplied (they actually say on their website it is GRACol 2009 <g>) that isn’t anything like any of their papers and worse, their papers are all over the place, full of OBA’s that don’t act anything alike.


    The alternative is for Blurb to simply supply the 4-5 actual profiles from the actual papers. Then there is the issue of soft proofing CMYK in Lightroom although there IS a possible solution that Steve Upton who writes ColorThink pointed out on the ColorSync list. Those users who have ColorThink Pro with the optional ColorCast module can "embed" the proofing effect of any ICC profile (RGB, CMYK, or more channels) INTO an existing RGB profile like AdobeRGB. That’s an expensive option and what we really need is for Adobe/Blurb to possibly licence this from CHROMIX and supply to all LR users. But it isn’t worthwhile until we have actual profiles for the actual print process.


    Lastly, if you compare even the GRACol profile to sRGB which is uploaded to Blurb, you see a significant amount of out of gamut blues, teals and some yellows that sRGB can’t contain as you've correctly pointed out. IOW, sRGB to Blurb isn’t ideal. Adobe RGB would be much better with still a tiny amount of OOG if we believe that the GRACol aim is valid for Blurb.


    At this point, simply sending the images to Blurb without soft proofing is the only viable solution because making decisions based on any soft proofing we can currently use is not valid. Blurb at this point isn’t setup to provide anything close to a color managed workflow. So putting the burden upon Adobe and the LR team to provide more functionality isn’t going to help.

    Author “Color Management for Photographers" &amp; "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"
    A
    As_Seen_ by_Janine
    Participating Frequently
    February 7, 2014

    I'm super frustrated that, despite all the intense marketing and advertising to promote Lightroom, specifically for the fact that it included the Blurb Book module, still in Feb. 2014, NOBODY can give a straight up answer on how to assure the best color when ordering books directly through Lightroom.

    Extremely annoying that when writing to Blurb tech support, they refer you to an article about how to color profile and softproof in Photoshop or InDesign, and totally ignore that your said you are using LIghtroom.

    They also tell you Lightroom can't support their profiles, yet at the same time, Blurb actually advertises Lightroom on their site and gives you a chance to order LR directly from their site. I find it unimaginable that they are actually promoting sales of Lightroom, yet they can't offer a single piece of tech support on how to get the best color when using Lightroom.

    So what gives????  What is the best way to assure accurate color when ordering Blurb books directly from Lightroom.

    My instinct is to save images as sRGB JPEGs, softproof (which thankfully we can now do in Lightroom), and hope for the best. I hope somebody can advise me because I have a HUGE wedding album book order, which I spent countless hours preparing in Lightroom, and now I'm afriad to place the order because Blurb can't seem to answer my simple question about how to get the best color.

    Has anyone had good success with Blurb Books using the book module in Lightroom and if so, what color profile did you submit?

    Janine Fugere

    As Seen by Janine: Eyes of the World Images

    TheDigitalDog
    TheDigitalDog
    Inspiring
    February 7, 2014

    As_Seen_ by_Janine wrote:

    I'm super frustrated that, despite all the intense marketing and advertising to promote Lightroom, specifically for the fact that it included the Blurb Book module, still in Feb. 2014, NOBODY can give a straight up answer on how to assure the best color when ordering books directly through Lightroom.

    Lightroom sends Blurb the data in sRGB. Nothing you can do about that. And while I'd prefer a larger color space such as Adobe RGB (1998) based on my understanding of Indigo CMYK, it isn't a hill worth dieing on.

    What gets sent through a RIP to the printers is CMYK and CMYK isn't supported in LR. Soft proofing without having the actual ICC profile of the output device is really a waste of time. If it makes some users feel better (or they charge by the hour <g>) go for it. sRGB and what comes off these presses are not even remotely the same so why soft proof using a profile that's based on a theoretical CRT circa 1994 and not the actual output device?

    Robust color management isn't on Blurb's radar. If it were, they would supply the actual ICC profiles for the various press technologies and papers they offer. One could use those profiles outside of LR (Photoshop comes to mind). They don't. So basically find another provider or send them the data they force you to send them out of LR.

    Author “Color Management for Photographers" &amp; "Photoshop CC Color Management/pluralsight"
    john beardsworth
    Community Expert
    john beardsworthCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    May 22, 2012

    You understand correctly - not least the point about Blurb's profile being a single one for all their papers and all their printers too. It's also CMYK profile, so it won't work in LR's RGB process.

    The best you can do in LR seems to be to soft proof in Develop using sRGB. I'm tending to stick to one paper and produce a small version of a book before committing to more cost.

    R
    RocksheadAuthor
    Participating Frequently
    May 22, 2012

    I'm sure your approach is right - except.... From what I can make out - and its not crystal clear - the Blurb profile they offer for their BookSmart option is not a CMYK version. If you have a moment to spare, maybe you could have a look at their page on this and see if you come to the same conclusion.

    http://www.blurb.com/guides/color_management/image_prep_booksmart

    It seems to be compatible with Photoshop, and there is a specific line in there saying not to put CMYK images into BookSmart. I have no idea how close BookSmart is to the Lr process; but this profile might be compatible. Interested in any comment you have. Cordially, dk

    john beardsworth
    Community Expert
    john beardsworthCommunity Expert
    Community Expert
    May 22, 2012

    I didn't think it was a profile for BookSmart - isn't it for Photoshop? That article is about preparing files in Photoshop, for BookSmart.

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices