Photoshop Colour Settings - New File

[thomasg29297715]

Hi,

I am still using Photoshop CS3 for digitial paintings which are for print only (not web). I am using the following colour settings (see image below). When I change the colours / saturation (no too an extreme) using Pro Photo RGB as the image shows, it produces very mixed results when producing a new print with these colour / saturation changes included. 

Can anybody advise what changes I should make to my file colour settings to help improve this? many thanks 

[Bob_Hallam]

Remove preserve embedded profiles for CMYK files.  After a file is converted to CMYK it is best to leave that alone in photoshop, otherwise CMYK files get converted back to lab and then converted to the SWOP color space you have selected.   Then next change involves  SWOP itself.  If you are sending files to a commercial printer, ask them what profile they use.   Chances are it is not going to be SWOP which is quite old.   

[thomasg29297715]

Hi Bob,

I am printing from my Epson Pro 3880 only, from home.

Should I select the 'off' option for preserve embedded profiles for CMYK files?

Many thanks. 

[TheDigitalDog]

Well you certainly don't want to send CMYK to that Epson.

And Preserve is always a safe option.

[Conrad_C]

---

@thomasg29297715 wrote:

Should I select the 'off' option for preserve embedded profiles for CMYK files?

---

I’m not even sure how CMYK worked its way into the conversation, if you’re always printing on your Epson 3880. The only time you want to think about CMYK is if you are going to send copies converted to CMYK for printing on a press.

Working in a CMYK mode document is too restricting if you have the Epson 3880, because the 3880 is more of a CcMmYKkk printer (all of those numerous cartridges);  it can reproduce a lot more colors than a CMYK press. That's why it's much better to work in a RGB color space that covers as many colors as possible of your favorite Epson 3880 ink and paper. And soft proof through that profile to simulate how colors will look in print.

The direct answer to your question is that in a modern color workflow, you should always have Preserve Embedded Profile on. Turning it off is only to accommodate unusual/special case workflows.

[NB, colourmanagement]

"Should I select the 'off' option for preserve embedded profiles for CMYK files?"

NO
You must respect the embedded profle of any file you open. But as others have written you don't want CMYK for the Epson, work in and stay in RGB

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]

Hi, ProPhoto is a giant colour space*, [profile map image from this discussion] ProPhoto's WAY larger in gamut volume than any ink on paper process can match.

[*the comparative 2D gamut volume image linked above shows a '2200', that’s an older Epson printer on matte paper, but it gives an idea of comparative gamut volume]

Even working on a well calibrated and profiled monitor display [vital] the colour included in a ProPhoto image can be disappointing when reproduced in print.

ProPhoto's basically a colourspace that takes some understanding, so is essentially an expert only domain.

::DISPLAY SCREEN INFLUENCES::

It's true that if your screen is a "standard": (i.e. non 'wide gamut', often described as 98% Adobe RGB) model then it too is incapable of displaying a lot of the colour values that can occur in a ProPhoto image. That's another stumbling block that large colour spaces like Pro Photo (and even AdobeRGB (1998) introduce to the workflow.  This means that on a standard gamut display screen you could be making adjustments in areas of high saturation that you just can't view on that screen. 

I suggest to learn about this you try "softproofing" on one of your reasonably saturated images - go to view/softproof/custom - then take the steps 1 and 2 below

[I will presume it IS a standard gamut display screen so, 2 things to test here]

no1: In view/softproof/custom, set the printer/paper ICC profile as "device to simulate"n match the rendering intent to the one you tend to use** and check 'preview' - you'll probably see the colours desaturate when softproofing is activated. If you also activate 'gamut warning' then that will overlay a solid tone over areas that will undergo significant changes in the conversion to the printer's ICC colourspace. Those changes can clip colour in highly saturated areas.

[**Switching between Perceptual and Relative Colorimetric rendering intents will also show differences here]

no2: Set the sRGB ICC profile [or your own display profile, if you know it to be accurate] as "device to simulate" and check 'preview' [set the rendering intent to Relative Colorimetric, with black point compensation checked], you'll probably see the colours desaturate when softproofing is activated. Especially if you check "ink black" as you should. If you also activate gamut warning, then that will overlay a solid tone over areas that will undergo significant changes in the conversion to the display screen's ICC colourspace.

SO

'no1' shows you what should happen when you print (if you have well calibrated and profiled display and an accurate printer profile, it should give an accurate preview.

'no2' shows you what parts of your image cannot be displayed accurately on a standard (normally approximately sRGB. gamut display screen) . IF you have a wide gamut screen (i.e. 98% Adobe RGB) then ignore my request to set sRGB in 'no2' and use AdobeRGB (1998) or the actual display profile instead.

Those experiments will help you understand what's happening.

::SOLUTION::
Some users optimnise images for print with softproofing as in  '1' (above) always active - that allows the user to try optimise the file specifically for the print process.

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

[Bob_Hallam]

Most fine art prints theese days far exceed the Adobe RGB color space.  ProPhoto is the best option for those.  Here is a plot of ProPhoto RGB and a inkJet printer plot at full gamut that show just how much a good print can exceed Adobe 1998 RGB.  The trade off in a workflow thats larget that the monitor color space is that your display can not be used for proofing purposes.  But many have found that a simple transform to Adobe 98 for viewing purposes is sufficient to provide a better view of their files that must be in ProPhoto.  

The red gamut is Adobe 1998 and the colored gamut is inkjet.  

I do not recommend sRGB because it is smaller than most commercial print spaces.  It's design is for internet use and was created as the lowest common gamut back in the days of CRT monitors.  Here is a plot of sRGB and a common print space for a CMYK press

The red gamut is sRGB and the CMYK press gamut is in color.  

Extend that gamut with any spot colors and it's even worse.  

So what matters in the choice of the CMYK profile is the print process used by your printer.   If it is Web Offset, then your profile may be CRPC5 but as I said check with your printer and ask them what they recommend.  

[thomasg29297715]

Many thanks Neil. 

I have used soft proofing before and will follow your guidelines to learn more. I'll also look for your articles as well. 

[thomasg29297715]

Many thanks Neil. 

I have used soft proofing before and will follow your guidelines to learn more. I'll also look for your articles as well. 

[TheDigitalDog]

The main issue I see above is not having the "Ask" warning check boxes on.

Yes, ProPhoto RGB is a huge gamut color space and ideal for many uses (and you can convert to something smaller). In addition to what was said already, it is useful to understand that NO printer can print the entire color gamut of even sRGB. So when you are told that printers today exceed Adobe RGB (1998), that is both true and untrue. Funneling colors into sRGB often results in clipping colors that can be printed if the color was in Adobe RGB (1998) and of course ProPhoto RGB; colors in output color gamut.

And there are color numbers in ProPhoto RGB that are not actual colors. And further, there are color numbers that are colors that you cannot see on any display.

As for the color settings, this applies to new and older versions, may be worth a watch:

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

Photoshop CC Color Settings and Assign/Convert to Profile video

[Bob_Hallam]

Andrew, Please explain why it is it is "useful to understand that NO printer can print the entire color gamut of even sRGB"?    How does that help the OP?

Historically, So long as you are aware that your print gamut is larget than a container space like sRGB or Adobe RGB that's all that is required to go to the next larger gamut size so you don't clip off image colors.    

[TheDigitalDog]

Andrew, Please explain why it is it is "useful to understand that NO printer can print the entire color gamut of even sRGB"?    How does that help the OP?

By @Bob_Hallam

Plot any printer you have over sRGB as I have below in ColorThink Pro:

The wireframe is an Epson P800/Luster.

The solid is sRGB; clearly you can see the printer can't  print the entire color gamut and for good reason! Simple matrix profiles of RGB working spaces when plotted 3 dimensionally illustrate that they reach their maximum saturation at high luminance levels. The opposite is seen with print (output) color spaces. Printers produce color by adding ink or some colorant, while working space profiles are based on building more saturation by adding more light due to the differences in subtractive and additive color models.

To say a printer can print all of such RGB Working Space isn't correct; they can't.

To say some output color spaces have larger color gamuts in SOME areas of color space, as seen above, is correct.

That is how it helps the OP and anyone else who wishes to understand the colorimetric facts.

Now if you have a printer who's gamut is larger than sRGB, sRGB is fully contained in that printer's gamut, do show us.

Historically, So long as you are aware that your print gamut is larget than a container space like sRGB or Adobe RGB that's all that is required to go to the next larger gamut size so you don't clip off image colors.  

By @Bob_Hallam

It isn't larger; the 3D gamut map shows this without any ambiguity. Even yours show this!

[D Fosse]

Let me introduce a somewhat different perspective. I think all this talk of "larger" and "smaller" gamuts is a red herring. There are bigger fish to fry.

Say you have an Adobe RGB file. Yes, some printers can reproduce a very small range of colors outside Adobe RGB. But there's a much larger range that will be severely clipped! Bob's plots illustrate that splendidly. That will have a much more obvious impact on the final result. ProPhoto won't help with that. You need to remap in any case, maybe extensively.

Working in ProPhoto has one very subtle implication, often overlooked: during editing, you don't really need to worry about gamut clipping at all. You can crank it up as much as you want. There's no check on it.

But in the real world, you will need to squeeze this down for any conceivable kind of output. And now you're getting into trouble! How do you remap full blast ProPhoto into real world output? With difficulty.

Future-proof? Maybe. But as long as prints are produced on paper, someting around Adobe RGB-ish will be the practical limit. New display technologies, yes, probably. But I'll cross that bridge when we get there. I have lots of files a few years old that fall well short of current technology and I don't lose sleep over that. It's what we had.

I say all this as one who positively hates gamut clipping, and go to great lengths to avoid it. That's the very reason I prefer Adobe RGB over ProPhoto. I deal with it early on, not at the very end.

[Conrad_C]

---

@D Fosse wrote:

How do you remap full blast ProPhoto into real world output? With difficulty...That's the very reason I prefer Adobe RGB over ProPhoto. I deal with it early on, not at the very end.

---

Making Adobe RGB the default (the working space) should help reduce the problem with a digital painting. Another way is to continue to work in ProPhoto RGB, but with soft-proofing set up for the target printer, to help preview and eliminate gamut clipping surprises.

[TheDigitalDog]

Soft proofing colors that exist that fall outside display gamut? That's going to be the case with ProPhoto RGB and many output color spaces too.

The red solid is my wide gamut SpectraView, the other is my Epson; some OOG colors; gotta live with that disconnect.

BIG reason to use ProPhoto RGB: due to the simple size and to fit of matrix profiles and output profiles, its like trying to fit round peg in the bigger square hole. RGB working spaces have shapes which are simple and predictable and differ greatly from output color spaces. Then there is the issue of very dark colors of intense saturation which do occur in nature and we can capture with many devices. Many of these colors fall outside Adobe RGB (1998) and when you encode into such a color space or smaller gamut, you clip the colors to the degree that smooth gradations become solid blobs in print, again due to the dissimilar shapes and differences in how the two spaces relate to luminance. So the advantage of ProPhoto RGB isn't only about retaining all those out-of-gamut colors it's also about maintaining the dissimilarities between them, so that you can map them into a printable color space as gradations rather than ending up as blobs. 

Here is a link to a TIFF that I built to show the effect of the 'blobs' and lack of definition of dark but saturated colors using sRGB (Red dots) versus the same image in ProPhoto RGB (Green dots). The image was synthetic, a Granger Rainbow which contains a huge number of possible colors. You can see that the gamut of ProPhoto is larger as expected. But notice the clumping of the colored red vs. green dots in darker tones which are lower down in the plot. Both RGB working space were converted to a final output printer color space (Epson 3880 Luster). 

http://www.digitaldog.net/files/sRGBvsPro3DPlot_Granger.tif

[TheDigitalDog]

I prefer ProPhoto RGB for print, not Adobe RGB (1998) and outlined this in a video the OP may wish to view as well:

The benefits of wide gamut working spaces on printed output:

This three part, 32 minute video covers why a wide gamut RGB working space like ProPhoto RGB can produce superior quality output to print.

Part 1 discusses how the supplied Gamut Test File was created and shows two prints output to an Epson 3880 using ProPhoto RGB and sRGB, how the deficiencies of sRGB gamut affects final output quality. Part 1 discusses what to look for on your own prints in terms of better color output. It also covers Photoshop’s Assign Profile command and how wide gamut spaces mishandled produce dull or over saturated colors due to user error.

Part 2 goes into detail about how to print two versions of the properly converted Gamut Test File file in Photoshop using Photoshop’s Print command to correctly setup the test files for output. It covers the Convert to Profile command for preparing test files for output to a lab.

Part 3 goes into color theory and illustrates why a wide gamut space produces not only move vibrant and saturated color but detail and color separation compared to a small gamut working space like sRGB.

High Resolution Video: http://digitaldog.net/files/WideGamutPrintVideo.mov
Low Resolution (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vLlr7wpAZKs&feature=youtu.be

I just want the facts to be outlined in terms of what can and cannot be printed, even from an sRGB perspective. So when we are told that printers today exceed Adobe RGB (1998), that is both true and untrue. 

[thomasg29297715]

Many thanks. 

[Conrad_C]

People seem to be concentrating on the Color Settings dialog box, but there’s nothing inherently wrong with the settings for doing digital paintings starting from an empty new Photoshop document, because then we know it is a ProPhoto RGB document with no profile conversions involved (therefore the Ask checkboxes don’t apply).

---

@thomasg29297715 wrote:

When I change the colours / saturation (no too an extreme) using Pro Photo RGB as the image shows, it produces very mixed results when producing a new print with these colour / saturation changes included. 

---

If that is the problem to be solved, then the two things to look at are:

Is the display profiled/calibrated?

What is the printer being used, and what are the print settings in Page Setup, the printer driver settings, and in the Print dialog box in Photoshop? Most importantly, what are the color and output profile settings in the Print dialog box?

[NB, colourmanagement]

It's right that ProPhoto could be part of your issue, no printer can manage all the colours that colourspace can contain. However, the way you print could easily be an issue. 

Some questions, basically we need more info"

What printer/ inks / media?

Next please screenshot [and insert not attach into a message here] each of the settings windows of the "Print" process .

A:

The main Photoshop print window [with your settings]

B:

The various "print settings" options [BTW its vital to select the right media here]

I hope you are using an ICC profile for the paper/printer and selecting that profile within Photoshop's "Photoshop controls Color" option? That way of printing controls the colour better than "Printer Manages Color" 

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

[Bob_Hallam]

ProPhoto is an essential color space profile for wide gamut printers.  Weather thay can reproduce all of it or not doesn't matter.  What matters is the printers color space is not clopped.  

What appears to be the problem is more than likely your monitor profile, and monitor gamut.  There are no Pro-Photo gamut displays out there.  So reemember if you have to use a wider gamut than your display to print with, you can not expect that you have a good soft proof.  If you have an Adobe 98 display you can conveert the pro-Photo RGB to Adobe 98 and use it as a visual representation of sorts but there will be issues.  

Adding color saturation using a small gamut display will not allow you to see those changes if you made them on an imagee using Pro-Photo.   So give the Adobe 98 trick a try and see if that doesn't hep you visualize the color adjustments better (If you have a wide gamut Display that covers Adobe 98) 

[TheDigitalDog]

ProPhoto is an essential color space profile for wide gamut printers.  Weather thay can reproduce all of it or not doesn't matter. 

None can. Not even close. FWIW, G255/R0/B0 in ProPhoto RGB isn't a color. And there are lots of such tripelets in that color space

There will never be a ProPhoto RGB monitor. Might as well expect one that emits X-rays for editing an image.

If you have Adobe RGB (1998) it is pointless to convert to ProPhoto RGB. You gain nothing doing so.

You can pour a pint of water into a gallon container. You still have a pint of water. The container doesn't do anything useful at this point.

You want to work in a gamut wider than your display, you do so carefully understanding there are output color spaces that have gamuts where SOME colors in color space are not visible, and you have Working Space where some colors are not visible. Out of gamut of the display. Such color spaces don't even get close to matching up!

You edit and when you see the colors stop changing as you move, say a slider like Vibrance or Saturation, you stop and back off! You may be affecting colors (or numbers that are not colors), you cannot see. Keep your eyes on Lab values.

[Bob_Hallam]

Seem to be misinterpreting what I said Andrew.  Please re-read it, as it is now your comments make no sense based on what I wrote..  

[TheDigitalDog]

Seem to be misinterpreting what I said Andrew.  Please re-read it, as it is now your comments make no sense based on what I wrote..  

By @Bob_Hallam

That's funny.

“The difference between the almost right word and the right word is really a large matter. ‘tis the difference between the lightning bug and the lightning.” - Mark Twain

[Bob_Hallam]

ok, nevermind , I see you were not trying to comment but more to insult.  Sad