The holy grail of missing piece for the whole VFX industry.
Every program under the sun is starting to support color managed workflows. I am talking full input-output under an artists control.
OCIO is where its at
and no the fnord plugin isnt a solution, thats just giving us a viewer lut (great) but we need input colorspace conversions also
AE allready supports ACES at least, can we have that in PS?
Please make that happen . affinity has OCIO.
up for it,it's incredible that we still haven't a way to work 32 bits linear,i can't believe it's still not there. almost every 3D application outputs ocio,how are we supposed to work without it?
I am surprised that this is not more popular here on the forums, because there are many thousands of visual effects artists for who not having ocio in photoshop is a problem, and the workarounds are very complicated.
Please integrate ocio! Thanks
Photoshop is color managed using an ICC workflow which is standard in the still imaging and printing industry, as opposed to video/VFX.
You can raise feature requests at the link below , where they will be seen by Adobe staff.
By the way for any developer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3J88sSa-20M
This is a pretty easy workflow and I'm sure there's a way to make it a bit more easy for everyone.
As of today many people are missing this feature,the guy on the video has solved it with a bit of a workaround,why not trying to start from there and make it user friendly?
I'll post it also in the feedback section!
Very funny, you guys Adobe employees mark as "the correct answer" between you, just to close the discussion.
ICC is a very old color management technology, and I have seen OCIO implemented directly with live ICC profiles in various visual effects studio.
Like the OP mentions, OCIO is the holy grail of color management, I think you probably have never tried it if you just want to close the discussion here or move it elsewhere where I need to register a new account to continue the discussion.
Affinity Photo, which serves the exact same user base as photoshop, print or else, has implemented OCIO very quickly and it is a great feature needed by a significant amount of users.
This forum is not monitored by Adobe developers. We are volunteer Photoshop users not employees.
Hence the response that if you want to request a feature it should be posted in the forum that was linked.
Ok sorry davescm, I was mislead by the 13 000 posts you have on the forum lol..!
No worries, I've been here a while 🙂
If other people are looking for other workarounds also fnord has an ocio plugin for AE and photoshop, but I have found it to be unstable and it would be much better implemented in Photoshop directly.
Color management for video has long been sorely needed, so any initiative is welcome. I'm sure OCIO is excellent, but this post should be in the Premiere Pro or After Effects forum, not here.
For photography and graphics, it's a solution in search of a problem. Icc-based color management does everything it's required to do, and very reliably so. There's no problem to solve. It just works. The biggest advantage is that it's conceptually extremely simple. Yes, it takes some math to get there, but that's what computers are for. Functionally it couldn't be simpler.
A lot of people fail to understand it because they think it's complicated and complex, and this makes them look for complicated solutions where, in fact, it's right under their noses.
Most (if not all) of the criticism directed against it, comes from people who misunderstand it. The number one issue we have here is other applications that, as it turns out, don't do it.
I think you don't understand what OCIO is...
First of all we are talking here about OCIO color management in photoshop (not video apps) for people working in the film industry, mostly the texture artists, matte painters, concept artists and environment artists in the visual effects studio. They all use photoshop for work in the movies.
OCIO is a color management system invented by Sony Imageworks, that has been adopted in *all* post-production studios. On top of everything, OCIO allows to work with ACES, which is the Academy (the association that give the oscars) official color pipeline, required for tv and film work (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Academy_Color_Encoding_System).
When you work as a post-production house, you need to comply with the color pipeline that the client (studios, netflix, HBO, etc) require you to work with (ACES), or you cannot qualify for the work.
So, while not explaining what ocio is exactly, this brings to the fact that post production houses need to comply with this color management system. Photoshop is widely used (it is the main software used for matte painters and concept artists) but we need heavy development or complicated workarounds to just have accurate colors witht the footage provided by the clients. And when we export our work, it's hard to maintain consisten results - which is what ocio is there for.
OK, that's a fair point. If it could work as a plugin, excellent (I don't know if it's possible to integrate two different color management systems in one application).
Still - there's just no way it will get any traction in the print/graphics/photography world. The current solution simply works too seamlessly and effectively.
This is the problem with an application like Photoshop, which has such a total market dominance that it's used by everybody, for everything. Even things it weren't really designed for, or isn't very appropriate for.
The video industry relies on output devices that are calibrated to a standard. That standard is the monitor 'profile' e.g. sRGB. That works well if the output device behaves and there are sufficient incremental steps in the calibration LUTs to achieve an accurate calibration.
The graphics and print rely on profiles which can describe very accurately the behaviour of the specific device with or without calibration , be that a monitor or printer. That is needed when there are so many variations in the device e.g. ink and paper combinations in the case of printers or printing presses.
So we have different color management systems to meet those different needs. I have no objection to any options being added to make Photoshop more versatile, indeed I would use them in 3D work, but would object if it meant any graphic industry standard options being compromised.
OCIO implementation would have no effect on what is already present. Also, the ocio implementations that I have seen to this day were using ICC profiles or luts adjustment layers so it would make sense to use this system as native.
OCIO is a color configuration. An analogy I could give you, is that 1 ocio configuration could link you to 200 ICC profiles, some of them serving different purposes (like a colorspace or a destination medium). We often see an ocio "look" that acts as a lut on a specific sequence or shot. We can generate icc profiles manually (by scripts) to emulate each of the ocio look needed on a project, or working colorspace.
However, a .ocio file is simply a (color configuration) file containing all the mentionned descriptions. By changing your ocio file, you can change your hundreds of ICC profiles instantlty.
I'm a photographer who shoots film and integrates 3D content. I use ACES and OCIO so that I can render in a larger colorspace than sRGB. Unfortunately, most of the 3D rendering apps only allowed sRGB output until recently integrating OCIO / ACES. I'm not making videos, I'm compiling images. Photoshop as well hasn't been a purist app solely for photographers and print designers for over 25 years now! It was the main app used for web design since 98! This is how technology works, it advances. We create solutions that work in particular contexts and as those contexts change and we learn new and better ways of doing things, the resulting technology changes to accommodate.. or it dies! I've been a loyal PS user now since I started design school in 94, but not having the ability to work with 3D content in ACES/OCIO has made me switch to Affinity. Ironically the only reason I now use PS is to use the EXR.IO plugin to convert my mask layers, which I then edit (in 32 bit) in Affinity!
As long as it doesn't interfere with standard icc color management, I'm all for it. It sounds like this might be plug-in-able. In that case, and if Photoshop is as extensively used in the cinema industry as you say, I'm sure it's just a matter of time before someone develops a plugin for it.
A valid objection could be that it increases confusion in users that are already confused enough as it is. But then they don't need to install the plugin.
I'm sure it's just a matter of time before someone develops a plugin for it.
There is a plug-in that the OP mentioned in the first post: "and no the fnord plugin isnt a solution"
Ah, missed that. Well, then, someone has to make a better plugin.
Interestingly, history tells us that Photoshop came into being in 1988 as a result of work by Thomas and John Knoll, originally released as "Image Pro" and was used in motion work right from the beginning. While Thomas Knoll was studying at University, John Knoll (his brother) was working on special effects at George Lucas' Industrial Light and Magic.
The classic book Photoshop Channel Chops tells us that the Photoshop's channels were heavily used for mask creation in moving image work right from the start.
ICC colourmanagement is industry standard in print and works extremely well for that purpose. It seems that what is needed to allow easier Photoshop use in the motion picture industry is a properly functioning plug-in. Or some significant effort in attempting to persuade Adobe to add OCIO support.
This forum is almost entirely staffed by volunteers, I think that Adobe will need to be petitioned direct on this subject.
neil barstow, colourmanagement.net
[please do not use the reply button on a message in the thread, only use the one at the top of the page, to maintain chronological order]
I love it. Which AI bot gives these "Correct answer" green checkmarks.. It's certainly not the community and it's absolutely not the right answer until OCIO is implemented via ICC or otherwise!
The Correct Answers are marked by other users here in the community. I’ve done a few myself. (I did not mark this one.) I don’t think a bot is involved although I could be wrong.
Anyway, that is the correct answer at this time. All of the points are correct:
You are correct too: Photoshop should definitely adapt to an important professional color management system that is outside the traditional print/web context. Most of the color management experts on this forum come from a print background, so you may not get as much sympathy as you might from video/FX/film pros who know that OCIO/ACES manage color in ways that print workflows have never had to deal with, especially with the emergence of wide gamut/HDR video workflows.
But, it is also correct that this is not the forum where that will be resolved, again making the last point in the Correct Answer, correct. 🙂
Yep, I confirm it was marked as the solution by a user, 2 mins after the guy with 200 000 posts has posted something along the lines of "we don't need it because we don't have it and it would change what we have".
It was clear to me that I was having a discussion with people that had no idea of how complex and important the Academy color management standards are, because they were too busy to make people learn photoshop in these forums, not to sound too rude.
I have made a setup for 150 shots matte painting shots of the finale of the latest HBO show last month, and our photoshop color workflow was very sketchy because I was not too familiar with this studio custom photoshop color pipeline.