Which color profile is best for Graphic Design Portfolios?

[ssaad97]

Hi Everyone!

I'm trying to create my first Graphic Design portfolio since I'll be applying for an Internship soon.

But I have a question, which color profile works best for printing artworks in high quality?

Because last time when I tried to print them, they came out really dark and wondered of what I did wrong. Some came out decently, and some didn't.

The types of projects I'm trying to print are mainly illustrations, and I'm using an A4 paper to print them out.

Here are some examples if you wanna see: Behance

Thanks!

[gator soup]

Andrew, yes, at the end of the conversation i believe we all agree on what you are saying

>> You always assume when assigning a profile.

i think you are referring my making an assumption (presume may be a better word there) that the profile i Assign (i.e. Assume) is what the creator intended (regardless if s/he's worked off a bad monitor and/or stripped the profile AND i am trying to get the color back on track to PROOF it on the monitor or paper)

>> Unless you've stood over the designer on his end, with his display and software, you're assuming what the image should look...

i believe it is extremely RARE for most down-stream shops to have benefit of that scenario in the real world, but you make a good point

i would add that most of the time when the majority shops receive something they don't understand - they steamroll over it and rarely contact the creator to resolve the issue beforehand

[D Fosse]

in time when sRGB goes away

sRGB will still be around with the current state of color management. We seemed to be on the right track for a while, then the whole momentum died with phones and tablets. Nobody seems interested anymore.

And there aren't any more wide gamut monitors now than there was 10 years ago. sRGB still works, and it still does what it always did: allow software developers to ignore color management.

Except for Apple. Apple really blew it with this one. They could have been the engine pushing the whole thing back to life, when they started using wide gamut panels in the MBPs and iMacs. But no, they couldn't join the rest of the world - they had to keep everything strictly in their own back yard by adopting the totally irrelevant DCI-P3 standard for digital cinema(!) projectors.

Yes, that means the MacOS ecosystem needs to have full color management. These are wide gamut panels, after all. But it does precisely nothing to advance the general implementation of color management. DCI what?

So sRGB still has a place. And that's fine. But what we should have, was a revision of the specs. Move the primaries to where they are on an average LCD, and correct the TRC to reflect the shadow dip in an LCD. Get rid of the linear toe.

[TheDigitalDog]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse  wrote

And there aren't any more wide gamut monitors now than there was 10 years ago. sRGB still works, and it still does what it always did: allow software developers to ignore color management.

I'd love to see data that backs that up. Considering that every new iPhone and iMac is wide gamut (unless you don't consider iPhone's are using displays). Further, the OS is color managed as it should be. And sRGB doesn't 'work' without color management! It provides a less bad result IF the display is somewhat close to sRGB. In the case of those iMac's, not the case in non color managed app's, sRGB is worse appearing.

The bottom line is very simple: if you care about color appearance, you use color management savvy applications. Then sRGB has a defined meaning and preview but then so does any other document with an embedded ICC profile (or EXIF data).

If you don't care about color appearance, you can ignore color management.

[D Fosse]

Yes, if you read further on, that's where I put that in Apple context

[TheDigitalDog]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse  wrote

Yes, if you read further on, that's where I put that in Apple context

Doesn't matter; there are far more companies and products offering wide gamut display systems today than 10 years ago. Sales of said devices? But if you have actual data to back up your facts that, above and beyond Apple (who produces a boat load of displays in wide gamut) that there aren't any more wide gamut monitors now than there was 10 years ago, please provide that data to us.

Further, the OS doesn't have to color managed but thankfully on Mac OS it is, what matters is that applications are color managed. Those we use because we care about the color appearance of images and such.

sRGB has it's place; as an output color space for the web and mobile devices that are not color managed and who's display systems are 'close' to sRGB. Otherwise again, any tagged RGB document will preview as it should. IF the entire web were somehow magically color managed, sRGB would be no more useful and somewhat less than Adobe RGB (1998) or DCI-P3 etc.

[TheDigitalDog]

thedigitaldog  wrote

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse   wrote

Yes, if you read further on, that's where I put that in Apple context

Sales of said devices?

Two years old, and speaking of more than just display systems for computers but telling:

Wide color gamut technology emerging as a key requirement for high-end displays

Companies are considering applying wide color gamut solutions to monitors and notebook PCs, so the wide color gamut display market is expected to grow continuously to a 27% share of the total display market on an area basis in 2021.

[TheDigitalDog]

If the print shop is color managed, ANY embedded profile is going to work. If they are not color managed, sRGB is meaningless.

[gator soup]

>> If they are not color managed, sRGB is meaningless.

how can it be meaningless (not useful) if sRGB gives the clueless print shop workflow a correct source profile "match" to their default RGB profile

and thereby properly sets up their RGB>PrintSpace/CMYK conversion process

regardless if they understand it or not?

[TheDigitalDog]

gator soup wrote

>> If they are not color managed, sRGB is meaningless.

how can it be meaningless (not useful) if sRGB gives the clueless print shop workflow a correct source profile "match" to their default RGB profile

and thereby properly sets up their RGB>PrintSpace/CMYK conversion process

regardless if they understand it or not?

A print shop is either color managed or it isn't. If it is, sRGB has meaning but so does any other RGB working space embedded into the document. All the profiles do is define the scale of the numbers. IF the print shop isn't color managed, sRGB is as meaningless as any other color space. Numbers without scale! If I tell you I live 1000 from your house, but don't define miles, feet, meters or any scale, that 1000 number is meaningless. R255/B98/G91 by itself is meaningless if it's in sRGB or anything else UNTIL you define the scale. Non color managed app's and shops have zero idea what that set of numbers mean without color management!

See:

sRGB urban legend & myths Part 2

In this 17 minute video, I'll discuss some more sRGB misinformation and cover:

When to use sRGB and what to expect on the web and mobile devices

How sRGB doesn't insure a visual match without color management, how to check

The downsides of an all sRGB workflow

sRGB's color gamut vs. "professional" output devices

The future of sRGB and wide gamut display technology

Photo print labs that demand sRGB for output

High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/sRGBMythsPart2.mp4

Low resolution on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyvVUL1gWVs

[D Fosse]

You don't need to convince me, Andrew, I'm entirely on your side. I've used wide gamut Eizo CGs and CXs exclusively for years, and don't even touch non-color managed software if I can at all avoid it.

All I'm saying is, sRGB still serves a purpose. With all the above in mind.

No, I don't have any statistics. But it's still Eizo or NEC for any serious use. The others, like Dell, BenQ, and Asus, are only in it so they can brag about "professional" lines to boost their image.

[TheDigitalDog]

https://forums.adobe.com/people/D+Fosse  wrote

No, I don't have any statistics. But it's still Eizo or NEC for any serious use. The others, like Dell, BenQ, and Asus, are only in it so they can brag about "professional" lines to boost their image.

Then the statement: "there aren't any more wide gamut monitors now than there was 10 years ago" can, should and will be ignored

Wide gamut (or otherwise) for 'serious' users vs. professionals is kind of equally speculative and up to interpretation, let's not go there and stick with colorimetric facts.

[donnal78720521]

I have been a printer for 40 years. If you use any RGB profile or images in your document, the color will not be true. They are entirely different color spaces and will not work. Convert your files to cmyk and use the output profile of the printer you are using. Some colors cannot be reproduced in printed form. Orange for an example is one of the worst colors to try and reproduce. It just doesnt work well. Find a good printer and work with them. They would be more than willing to help

[TheDigitalDog]

donnal78720521  wrote

I have been a printer for 40 years. If you use any RGB profile or images in your document, the color will not be true.

What? EVERY capture device on this planet, scanner and digital camera, produces RGB data. So that blanket statement makes no sense to me.

VERY very few devices are true RGB printers (there are a few contone laser or CRT devices that image onto sliver material) but otherwise, the printers are CMYK (or CcMmYK or other colorants) but the facts are, we start with RGB data and convert to some output color space. Orange can reproduce just fine when we use orange inks!

Convert your files to CMYK indeed, if and when CMYK is necessary AND you have the specific recipe for output CMYK; meaning printers like you should be provided output ICC profiles for the specific process.

[donnal78720521]

Of course capture devices are rgb. They rely on light to create white space. Printing doesnt. Im giving advise from many years of experience. If you want to ignore it, then do so. A lot of printers dont give advise because it is ignored. Orange ink is a spot color, NOT CMYK. 

[TheDigitalDog]

donnal78720521  wrote

Of course capture devices are rgb. They rely on light to create white space. Printing doesnt. Im giving advise from many years of experience. If you want to ignore it, then do so. A lot of printers dont give advise because it is ignored. Orange ink is a spot color, NOT CMYK. 

Yet you wrote: If you use any RGB profile or images in your document, the color will not be true.

You may want to correct this.

And as outlined, there are actual RGB output printing devices. Their color will be 'true' (whatever that's supposed to mean) again, when converted to the proper/ideal recipe of RGB using an output profile.

Orange ink isn't a spot color when it's not used as a spot color but within the full mix of output called HiFi color. Then it's CMYKO (or any other such colorant). Ever worked on a HiFi digital press like an Indigo?

[donnal78720521]

There are devices which are supposed to be rgb, however, that is questionable. If you want to be a great designer, rather than an average designer. Work with the device output profiles. If you think that all the printing companies in the world are going to buy. equipment to cater for a few, you are mistaken. It would be cost prohibited. As I said, do it right from the start and work with CMYK. I print fashion and makeup magazines for a living and color matching is essential. All of the professional photographers convert to cmyk to ensure color matching is as close to real life as possible. 

[TheDigitalDog]

donnal78720521  wrote

There are devices which are supposed to be rgb, however, that is questionable.

Only to you. You apparently haven't any experience with devices like Lambada, Lightjet, Pictrography, Frontier's or a large range of devices called film recorders. They absolutely take and image output using RGB; with lasers, CRTs etc. They absolutely are fed RGB data and the colors can and are 'true' (again, whatever that's supposed to mean on your generalizations).

You've entered a thread a year old for some reason and made a blanket statement that's untrue.

"All generalizations are false, including this one".-Mark Twain

And the one you made that's utterly untrue:

If you use any RGB profile or images in your document, the color will not be true.

That statement is absolutely incorrect.

[TheDigitalDog]

Here, learn the facts about true RGB printers:

What is a Lambda printer? | Metro Imaging | London | UK

Fuji Frontier Printer

LightJet - Wikipedia

Film recorder - Wikipedia

All use RGB profiles, RGB images, RGB documents for output.

[donnal78720521]

Im trying to tell you that if you want good reproduction across all devices use cmyk. I have 3 printing businesses and yes I have owned an indigo press. It comes down to economics. If you want to be an accomplished designer who can design for the larger market place which is a compatible mix of budget for your client and available resources, it is best to stay within the printing industry standards. If you want to design quirky individual jobs, go for it. You are not the only person on this forum. You obviously have a particular market in mind and that's great. However, some designers will have clients who want to print affordable large run jobs which require proper color profiles. The first thing any pre-press department will ask you to do is convert all spot colors and rgb files to cmyk if the job is being printed on the high end presses used by the big printing companies. Im sorry that you are so annoyed at my comments, however, there are clients out there who want to print things such as magazines, corporate materials and large run government documents. My comments are not untrue, only practical.

[TheDigitalDog]

donnal78720521  wrote

Im trying to tell you that if you want good reproduction across all devices use cmyk. 

Except for devices you can't and shouldn’t

I don’t know if you are purposely trying not to understand this, or if you are really struggling with it.

You own an Indigo, you should know it takes multiple inks and those that are not CMYK are not spot colors. They are used for extended gamut.

Your blanket statement was just that, and technically wrong. The facts of multiple printers that accept and print IN RGB are above. You can of course ignore them as they dismiss your blanket generational a year after the question here was answered.

“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn't true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Søren Kierkega

Don't fool yourself. Other's here can see the facts above and decide not to fool themselves.

[donnal78720521]

Im sorry that you have taken my comments so personally. My comments as I said are based on the wider printing industry and not the niche machines coming into the market place. Entry level flat sheet offset presses cost upwards of 600,000 each and have a working life of about 40 years, so we are not in the habit of upgrading too often. If you only want to mention the newer digital forms of press, then I have misunderstood the thread. However, I didnt think that the mention of "printing company" only referred to small - medium sized digital companies. I thought it meant all printers/printing companies. The wider industry. If the reproduction is intended for small run niche machines, great.

[TheDigitalDog]

donnal78720521  wrote

Im sorry that you have taken my comments so personally. 

I haven't, that's your assumption. I'm simply correcting a few statements you made that are generalizations that are technically incorrect. Don't take it personally; learn how indeed, there are several classes of printers and output devices that take/use RGB profiles, RGB images, RGB documents for output. And produce 'true' color (whatever that's assumed to mean).

donnal78720521  wrote

My comments as I said are based on the wider printing industry and not the niche machines coming into the market place

My comments are based on a printing industry too, one you don't seem to be aware of. Now you are.

[D Fosse]

Let's just be specific here. This isn't about RGB vs CMYK, this is about 1) color management and 2) color space gamut limits.

Both of these are entirely predictable and entirely "true". Yes, you should always keep the final destination gamut in mind, but that applies whether you're in RGB or CMYK.

So saying that a color is not "true" is just confusing the issue. It can, however, be out of gamut, which is something you can deal with in very specific ways, i.e. soft proof and gamut remapping if required.

[NB, colourmanagement net]

Hi donnal,

this thread is a year old now

please check my answer above which the Original Poster marked as correct.

As he explained, he is printing himself, in house on A4 paper. In all likelihood, that's going to be a "Quickdraw driver" Inkjet printer, which means it accepts RGB and converts in the driver to CMYK or probably C,l.c,M,l.m,Y,K, l.k

so he'd be fine with RGB in this case.

~If were to send CMYK it would be converted back to RGB then to CMYK or whatever recipe suits the inkset. All in the driver.

His issue was with appearance compared to his display screen, thats an issue very likely to be solved by good display screen calibration and by choosing the right ICC profile for his inkjet paper.

I hope this helps

neil barstow, colourmanagement

[donnal78720521]

Hi Neil

Yes im aware of the original post, however, I was more concerned that a person would hand off an RGB file for print as mentioned in one of the posts. Given the number of devices and the huge lack of understanding in regards to the printing process, companies like mine do not accept anything other than cmyk based files with embedded profiles. I suppose the printing industry is just tired of being given rgb based files with some designers expecting our processes to fix them. You would be surprised to know how many print shops turn off the fiery color management and use the source profiles to get accurate color reproduction these days. The thread may be a year old, however, it is being used as a reference for color profiles through google. The only reason I knew about this post, was because a clients used the information in this thread to set his print profile as rgb and stood in our print shop having a hissy fit because we sent him away to fix his file.