Assign color profile vs proof setup

[Andygeol]

Confusing problem. I use a calibrated monitor and have always proof matched paper via View>Proof setup>Custom>icc profile of a particular paper, then used adjustment layer to get a better match. This is now not getting me close to what is coming out of my printer. What I have now discovered is that if I go to EDIT> Assign Profile>Profile (icc of the paper), the monitor and print are a VERY close match.

I have always been told that Edit asign profile should be the original colorspace the image was captured in ie Adobe1998. This ensured that what came out of the camera and what was on the screen would be a close match.What has gone wrong? Is it User error or has PS changed?

I use Win 10, PS CC ver 23.4.1

[TheDigitalDog]

The only time you use the Assign Profile command is if the document has no profile (kind of rare) and you know what profile to assign as it defines that color space. OR (even more rare) the image has the wrong profile assigned. Otherwise don't mess with it, no matter what the display preview looks like. 

See:

http://digitaldog.net/files/06AssignProfileCommand.pdf

See: http://digitaldog.net/files/PhotoshopColorSettings.mp4

Photoshop CC Color Settings and Assign/Convert to Profile video

Now if you're not getting a soft proof that matches your display, that's another issue altogether. 

See:

Why are my prints too dark (or don't match the display)?
Why doesn’t my display match my prints?
A video update to a written piece on subject from 2013
In this 24 minute video, I'll cover:

Are your prints really too dark?
Display calibration and WYSIWYG
Proper print viewing conditions
Trouble shooting to get a match
Avoiding kludges that don't solve the problem

High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/Why_are_my_prints_too_dark.mp4
Low resolution: https://youtu.be/iS6sjZmxjY4

[Andygeol]

Thanks for your reply. I have never really looked at Assign Profile 'cos I have always been told to leave it alone. My working colour space is always Adobe1998 RGB cos that's what comes out of the camera.  I only started looking at this because what was on my screen  and what came out of the printer was way off. It is as if the PS print engine is not picking up that RGB profile setting at all and using the paper icc profile in its place.

I calibrate my monitor using iDisplay Pro and use the paper manufacturers icc profiles and my workflow has not changesd.

[Test Screen Name]

If Assign Profile "fixes" the profile, then something is very wrong. Not sure what, but it's kind of like sticking a label on a banana saying "apple". It is done when the file was prepared wrong, and never otherwise...

[Andygeol]

I know that this is wrong which is why I am very confused. I haven't changed my workflow from camera through ACR to PS then print with paper proper profiles. Adobe RGB 1998 workspace all the way through and haven't seen this level of mismatch before. I am now waiting for more paper to try different things including removing then reinstalling Photoshop

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@Andygeol wrote: I am now waiting for more paper to try different things including removing then reinstalling Photoshop

---

You should always test output using good color reference images designed for that task. The color reference images RGB values are such that they are set for output and are editing and display agnostic. Test the output this way and examine for the same color issues so we know it's not your image-specific issues causing the problems:
http://www.digitaldog.net/files/2014PrinterTestFileFlat.tif.zip

[Bob_Hallam]

Keep your currently assigned ICC profile as Adobe RGB.  That is not the problem.  The problem as you have described it is that your monitor and proof do not match.  This is a common problem and can be resolved with a few changes.   

First, make sure your screen is in a Dim but controlled light environment and you have a way to view your proof under the same lights maybe a short distance from your display or have a viewing light to view your prints from GTI.  They make tabletop viewers that are pretty reasonable.  

Second, Calibrate your display and make sure the Gamut of that display is close in size to your chosen color space of Adobe RGB.  Many times this critical step is overlooked and the user is on an sRGB display color-correcting Adobe RGB files.  That won't work because the monitor's color space is smaller than the container space of the image.   Choose ICC profile v4 or a matrix-based version 2 profile.   When you calibrate use an advanced mode that allows you to adjust the white point of the display.  This step is critical to your workflow because the canned choices do not work well.  Then it's just lather, rinse and repeat until you have the exact right profile white point for your controlled light viewing area.  

Lastly, profile your printer, Ust M1 if your paper has optical brightness, or MO if it doesn't, and keep it profiled.  Use your destination or printer profile to view through in Photoshop and simulate the paper color.  If the paper color is incorrect.  Make sure you have evaluated the paper correctly for Optical brighteners and possibly make another profile with the correct M standard.  

That will solve your problem.  

[Andygeol]

Monitor and  proof not matching is a gross understatement. I always use the same paper, profile my monitor every 2 weeks and generally have a very close match between print and monitor. However now, since last PS update (ver 23.4.1), if I print test reference images without letting PS control colours all is ok but when I let PS manage colours using appropriate icc profiles it is totally off.

This leads me to conclude the problem lies with PS

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@Andygeol

This leads me to conclude the problem lies with PS

---

No such issues here.

But for fun, roll back a few versions and test. You want to go back to previous versions?

In Adobe Creative Cloud, select PS, click on the three dots and select "Other Versions".

[Bob_Hallam]

What is the light in the area of your monitor and proof?  If this light is not daylight balanced and dim without window light, what happens is your eyes will adapt to that light and the appearance of your display will be way off.  So how's your lighting?

[TheDigitalDog]

White (Chromatic) adaption. Has nothing per se to do with daylight.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chromatic_adaptation

That no display or man-made illuminant actually produces daylight is worth investigating.

[Bob_Hallam]

The definition is correct, but you've not understood the principle.  Chromatic adaption is always at play in a monitor-based proofing environment.   Consider the solution I have outlined to help the OP.  Then let's change that to a calibrated monitor near a window.   Both are daylight environments, but one is static (The viewing booth with no windows and the other is dynamic.  (Window light)  Window light is dynamic as you know because it changes color temperature throughout the day.  In the morning it's cool and in the evening it's warm.  You know this because you must change your camera's white balance (Unless your's is set to  Auto in which case the camera is adjusting to the changing color temperature) Cameras have to do this to mimic what our brains do, and keep the white balance of the image "close" to what humans see for color cast.   

Having a dynamic adapted white (There's where chromatic adaption applies ) and a static display that was color balanced at some point in the day and did match the proof.  It will be easy to see later on in the day that the display and proof no longer match.   Your brain has a new adapted white and the monitor will appear off-color because it is not as bright as the main illuminant in the area.    You can do the same test using a static viewing booth at ISO standard brightness or drop it to the level of brightness of the display.  Either way, it is best to adjust the white point of the display to the hard copy proof when viewed in Absolute colorimetric rendering intent (Paper simulation) to make the final monitor white point adjustment.  This will assure you that other properly profiled papers will also match when they are being viewed using their paper white points.    That is how chromatic adaption works in a dual-adapted system.  

[TheDigitalDog]

The definition is correct, but you've not understood the principle.  Chromatic adaption is always at play in a monitor-based proofing environment.  

I never said otherwise. I simply pointed out the actual misunderstanding and generalization about daylight. Or the fact, that there are no actual displays or man-made illuminants that produce it.

[Bob_Hallam]

The "misunderstanding" is assumed.  Daylight is variable light, which is an important factor in managing a color-managed display.   I wish I had a dollar for everyone that told me they had a calibrated display but also had that display in a room lit by window light.  That window light being brighter than a display will always be the adapted white.  

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@Bob_Hallam wrote:

 Daylight is variable light, which is an important factor in managing a color-managed display. I wish I had a dollar for everyone that told me they had a calibrated display but also had that display in a room lit by window light.  That window light being brighter than a display will always be the adapted white.  

---

Do show us an SPD you've measured of a "calibrated" display that matches the SPD of daylight.

Please show us an SPD of a viewing booth that also matches a "Calibrated" display. And yet, some here can get them to match visually. 

If I had a dollar for every SPD provided that does this, well I'd have no dollars. 

For those in need of a review: 

http://digitaldog.net/files/15TheRightLightpart1.pdf

http://digitaldog.net/files/22Thecolorofwhite.pdf

Of course, easy to find a window light with a far lower cd/m2 value than a display. 

[Bob_Hallam]

That's just silly. Your tangent here has nothing at all to do with what I have written.  Seems I keep asking you to RE-read Andrew.  Try again. Thanks 

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@Bob_Hallam wrote:

That's just silly. Your tangent here has nothing at all to do with what I have written. 

---

About the topic and OP issue with Assign Profile; nope.

Again , I simply pointed out the actual misunderstanding and generalization about actual daylight. Or the fact, that there are no actual displays or man-made illuminants that produce it. Seems I keep having to write again, please re-read.

[Bob_Hallam]

Again nothing to do with monitor calibration and the adapted white.  This is getting very old Andrew.  

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@Bob_Hallam wrote:

Again nothing to do with monitor calibration and the adapted white. 

If this light is not daylight balanced and dim without window light, what happens is your eyes will adapt to that light and the appearance of your display will be way off.

Daylight is variable light, which is an important factor in managing a color-managed display.

Consider the solution I have outlined to help the OP.  Then let's change that to a calibrated monitor near a window.

---

🤔

[Andygeol]

Thanks but not relevant to the problem.

[Andygeol]

I use 6000k lighting. Too light / dark is not the problem. Poor colour matching / contrast is the issue, not the monitor or the printer.

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@Andygeol wrote:

I use 6000k lighting. Too light / dark is not the problem. Poor colour matching / contrast is the issue, not the monitor or the printer.

---

Getting back to actually trying to aid you on a fix, another thing to try IF only Photoshop is the issue:

Quit Photoshop if running.

Relaunch Photoshop and open the file that you want to print.

Press the Spacebar on your keyboard before you click File > Print. This process resets printer preferences that have been written into the image. 

See: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/troubleshoot-printing-problems.html

[Bob_Hallam]

6000k is too blue, but the other   issue that will cause poor matching is the spectral power distribution iv the wavelengths in the lighting.   This and CRI (color rendering index can be a huge issue in the way your prints look under those lights.  Low CRI (below 90) and there can be some serious matching issues.  Even a high 90 CRI light can cause major problems if they are LED.   LED lighting has a wavelength hole at about 470nm (aqua colors) where the diodes can't be doped due to today's limitations.   Making the small investment in good 5000k iso standard lighting is well worth it in any quality color workflow.  Now by iso standard, I mean lighting systems that comply    GTI and Just are 2 companies that produce this type of lighting at iso standards.   

[NB, colourmanagement · Accepted solution]

"Monitor and  proof not matching is a gross understatement. I always use the same paper, profile my monitor every 2 weeks and generally have a very close match between print and monitor. However now, since last PS update (ver 23.4.1), if I print test reference images without letting PS control colours all is ok but when I let PS manage colours using appropriate icc profiles it is totally off.

This leads me to conclude the problem lies with PS"

It seems like you've either found a bug or something has changed. IF the printer profile is accurate and the screen is accurately calibrated AND if the viewing conditions are acceptable then using "PhotosomMamages Color" is that way to go, be sure also to set the print driver media options consistently. 

I wonder if you are experiencing a change to the display profile bright about by an update. I'll post some tips about that too 

I hope this helps
neil barstow, colourmanagement net :: adobe forum volunteer:: co-author: 'getting colour right'
google me "neil barstow colourmanagement" for lots of free articles on colour management

[NB, colourmanagement]

Windows display profile, display profile issues on Windows

Here's something to try

It'll only take a few minutes and is good troubleshooting.

At least once a week on this forum we read about this, or very similar issues of appearance differing between colour managed applications.

Of course you must not expect accurate colour with programs such as Windows "Photos", because in most versions colour management is not implemented there, so such programs are incapable of providing accurate image display.

Unfortunately, with Microsoft hardware: Windows updates, Graphics Card updates and Display manufacturers have a frustratingly growing reputation for automatically installing useless (corrupted) monitor display profiles.

I CAN happen with Macs but with far less likelihood, it seems.]

The issue can affect different application programs in different ways, some not at all, some very badly.

The poor monitor display profile issue is hidden by some applications, specifically those that do not use colour management, such as Microsoft Windows "Photos".

Photoshop is correct, it’s the industry standard for viewing images, in my experience it's revealing an issue with the Monitor Display profile rather than causing it. Whatever you do, don't ignore it. As the issue isn’t caused by Photoshop, please don’t change your Photoshop ‘color settings’ to try fix it.

To find out if the monitor display profile is the issue, I recommend you to try temporarily setting the monitor profile for your own monitor display under “Device” in your Windows ‘color management’ control panel to “sRGB IEC61966-2.1”. (If you have a wide gamut monitor display (check the spec online) it’s better to try ‘AdobeRGB1998” here instead as it more closely approximates the display characteristics).

Click ‘Start’, type color in the search box,

then click Color Management. In the Devices tab, ensure that your monitor is selected in the Device field.

You can click to ADD to add “sRGB IEC61966-2.1” (or AdobeRGB1998) if not already listed there.

Again - IF you have a wide gamut display I suggest trying “AdobeRGB1998”

Once it’s selected, be sure to check “Use my settings for this device” up top.

And click on “set as Default Profile - bottom right

Screenshot of Color Management Control Panel

Quit and relaunch Photoshop after the control panel change, to ensure the new settings are applied.

Depending on the characteristics of your monitor display and your requirements, using sRGB or Adobe RGB here may be good enough - but no display perfectly matches either, so a custom calibration is a superior approach.

If this change to the Monitor Display profile temporarily fixes the appearance issue, it is recommended that you should now calibrate and profile the monitor properly using a calibration sensor like the i1display pro, which will create and install its own custom monitor profile. The software should install its profile correctly so there should be no need to manually set the control panel once you are doing this right.

Still got problems?

Perhaps try resetting Photoshop preferences?

Resetting restores Photoshop's internal preferences, which are saved when Photoshop closes. If they become corrupt then various issues can occur.

Here’s some info on how to do that:

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/preferences.html

And

https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-discussions/quick-tips-how-to-reset-photoshop-pre...

You may want to backup your settings and your custom presets, brushes & actions before restoring Photoshop's preferences.

Here is general info that:  https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/preferences.html#BackupPhotoshoppreferences

Also take a look at the following article and check if that helps: 

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/printing-color-management-photoshop1.html

Preferences file location: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/preference-file-names-locations-photoshop.html

I hope this helps
neil barstow, colourmanagement net :: adobe forum volunteer:: co-author: 'getting colour right'
google me "neil barstow colourmanagement" for lots of free articles on colour management