Rob Cole wrote: UPDATE: ----------- I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "image quality", because that term means different things to different people. You *should* be able to get better "detail" quality in Lr by adjusting settings in the detail panel. BUT DPP may also do some intelligent contrast reduction stuff by default which can make a photo seem sharper or more clear without increasing noise. Similar results are had in Lr by +exposure -highlights +shadows and/or +clarity. But now that I'm thinking about it, PV2012 *does* seem to run a little noisy in the shadows (only), more so than PV2010 did, or DPP/NX2, so I do share that experience with you, FWIW. ----------- In addition to Rob's suggestions try using lower Sharpening Radius and Detail settings with a higher Amount setting. With LR +exposure -highlights +shadows and/or +clarity AND modifying your Sharpening and NR settings you should be able to easily achieve an image that is better than DPP. I find DPP very limited in it's capability to recover highlight and Shadow detail compared to LR's PV2012 process. Here's a Canon 5D MKII image shot with a 17-40mmL using LR and DPP default settings. Click on the image to open it, right-click on it and select 'Save Image As,' download it to your desk top, and view in LR or PS at 1:1 to see the differences in sharpness: Personally I prefer a less-sharpened image, but clearly LR can duplicate DPP's sharpening look even without applying PV2012's Highlights, Shadows, and Clarity controls. ... View more

Agreed, but it has happened to some people and requested reprints of the very same uploaded PDF are often much better.  Google 'blurb quality issues.' Here's Blurb's return policy statement: http://www.blurb.com/returns "Blurb guarantees your satisfaction  with the workmanship of your printed book. On the off chance your printed book arrives damaged or with a manufacturing defect, contact us via Blurb’s Customer Support within 14 days of receipt. We’ll make things right. Also note this statement: "Please note that each book you order from us is individually made by one of Blurb’s top-notch professional book-printing partners. There may be minor differences across different prints of the same books and/or across books printed by our different book-printing partners, including, but not limited to, slight variances in color fidelity and binding type. While we work very hard to keep our product as consistent as possible, this variation is a normal occurrence and is not considered a manufacturing defect or a defect in workmanship and does not qualify for a reprint." Blurb doesn't have it's own printing facilities, which is why they state there could be variation in "color fidelity" and even binding type. So it could be hit-or-miss dependent on the location where the book is actually printed. ... View more

I suggest you contact Blurb technical support concerning the issues you've reported here and your dissatisfaction. There is a very good possibility they can make adjustments on their end to improve the quality of the printing. They will usually run a 2nd book for free if it's obvious the printing is way off-target, such as in your case. Make sure to provide them with example pages for both the color and B&W images. At the very least they will provide suggestions that may be helpful. Good luck and let us know how you make out. ... View more

This image is very over-exposed with significant highlight clipping. There is also lens flare due to shooting directly into the very bright area behind the man's head (i.e. sun). In addition your LR settings make the image even lower in contrast, saturation, with a magenta cast on my calibrated sRGB gamut monitor. Below is a quick attempt using LR settings to recover the image: Here's a RawDigger view of the raw image data: ... View more

No, I'm suggesting you convert to DNG one or two of the images that have issues, which will include your LR settings inside the DNG files. Then post the DNGs to Dropbox or other site so that we can download and review the images for LR adjustment, gamut, or other issues. ... View more

psb wrote: @ trshaner: thanks, yes i could do that, but that would not explain, why my final book, if exported as pdf or jpgs (srgb) looks just fine and identical to my LR5 book in LR5. The sRGB color space is wider than the Blurb CMYK color space as I posted earlier here: http://forums.adobe.com/message/6098464#6098464 When comparing the "printed"  Blurb book page to an onscreen sRGB image it will have lower contrast range, saturation, and limitations in the reproducible color gamut. I suggest  examining some DNG images with your LR settings that have issues in the Blurb book reproduction. ... View more

The quickest troubleshooting method  is to post a raw image file converted to DNG with your LR settings for download. Please choose an image or two that exhibit the issues. Please also post a picture of the same image in the book with a description of the issues. My suspicion is that your LR Tone (Tonwert) settings are causing the problem. ... View more

If you do a Google search on Quicktime Gamma Shift it pulls up 145,000 matches. Here's the first one: http://www.videocopilot.net/blog/2008/06/fix-quicktime-gamma-shift/ The above "fix" apparently prevents streaming the file, so this may not be a suitable solution. What video file format are you exporting from QT Pro? ... View more

I had a similar problem with video on my WIndows 7 system where blacks were washed out. It was an issue with the Nvdia graphics driver video color settings under 'Advanced.' The default settings is 'Limted (16-235)' and changing it to 'Full (0-255) corrected the issue: ... View more

Janine, the book looks excellent and I'm sure your client and their family are very pleased with the results. Thank you for sharing your results! The only suggestion I would make is that you can eliminate creating sRGB JPEGs for the book layout. Book Export to PDF (or to Blurb) converts the raw images to sRGB profile JPEGs, so this extra step is not required. When you review the PDF you are seeing the actual sRGB JPEGs  that are used to print the book. You may also want to create a Blurb Ebook for your client if they have an iPad or other tablet. I'm also a big fan of Blu-ray slideshows for viewing on a large screen HDTV. Unfortunately, LR's Slideshow module lacks the capability to create a Blu-ray disc and is still very limited on transitions, effects, and music support. I finally gave up and now use Proshow Producer, which provides a myriad of stunning effects and output formats. Great job! Cheers, Todd ... View more

Good luck and please follow-up with your results. ... View more

I tested this using an Adobe RGB CCPP image. PS shows three patches as out of gamut for the sRGB profile and four different patches for the Blurb profile. However when doing the actual conversion direct to Blurb.icc versus to sRGB and then to Blurb.icc there is no visual difference. The actual patch values also are within <0.5% RGB readings. This test is limited to the gamut represented in the 18 color patches on the CCPP and we  know from the 3D Gamut comparison in my post #11 that there is some deep blue-green (i.e. tuquoise) and yellow spectrum that falls outside the sRGB color space. If your images don't have heavily saturated areas with these colors then using sRGB images is of no practical consequence. Given that soft proofing doesn't tell you the "degree" that a color is out-of-gamut the best check is to print a test book with images that may have color issues. (Adobe RGB profile JPEG Upload) ... View more

As_Seen_ by_Janine wrote: trshaner,  While the idea of sending a ProPhoto or RGB PDF sounds better than just going with sending sRGB, I thought this is not possible if uploading the book directly from Lightroom to Blurb, which automatically converts images into sRGB JPEGs. Are you referring to creating a PDF with ProPhoto or RGB images, and then using the PDF to Book option which is available at the link you provided?   SOLUTION #1 LR's book module is Blurb's 'PDF To Book' process with a GUI that provides selection of book size, cover type, paper type, logo page, estimated price, layout controls, and file upload utility. When you select 'Blurb' at the top of 'Book Settings you see all of these options. If you select 'PDF' as the 'Book Setting' additional settings appear for JPEG quality, color profile, file resolution (s/b 300dpi), and sharpening. These are only applied when you 'Export Book to PDF with Book type 'PDF' selected, not 'Blurb.' When using the Blurb setting the PDF  is output at 300 ppi, sRGB, Quality ??, and a fixed sharpening setting probably based on paper type selected. The PDF output appears to be otherwise identical for both the Blurb and PDF settings. So instead of using LR's 'Send Book to Blurb' button you would manually upload your 'PDF' settings created export file here: http://www.blurb.com/pdf-to-book Here you enter your book specifications for size & orientation, page count, paper type, cover type, and additional information required to place the order. You then upload your book 'Export to PDF file.' I suggest adding a comment in the description field that states the PDF uses Adobe RGB color profile images, which they will discover when the RIP conversion to CMYK. You can contact Blurb Customer Support and present them with this workflow to verify there are no issues. SOLUTION #2 Simply use the LR Book module and process your images as per the suggestions here. Submit a test book and if the results meet your expectations you're done! If not you may may want to print another test book using Solution #1 with the 'PDF To Book' workflow. ... View more

Andrew Rodney wrote: 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 totally agree and it's also one of the reasons I haven't bothered making soft-proof adjustments to my placed book images. About all I do is set White and Black clipping points and Highlights and Shadows controls to "unblock" those areas. I'm also pretty sure  if I sent Blurb a ProPhoto or Adobe RGB PDF the results would be the same (or perhaps even better?) than a file converted to the Blurb.icc profile during export to PDF. As you can see from the image in my post #14 the color-match is pretty darn good, at least with the Blurb Standard 80# paper type. ... View more

I tried using 'Export Book to PDF' in the LR Book module with 'Book' set to 'Blurb' and the PDF images are all tagged as sRGB profile and 8-bit color. SUGGESTION If you set 'Book' to 'PDF' under 'Book Setting' you can use Adobe RGB profile, 300 ppi, and your own Sharpening selection, which as Andrew Rodney mentioned is a better choice. You can submit the LR Exported PDF at Blurb's 'PDF To Book' upload page and they will do the proper CMYK conversion on their end. The only issue is that the images are still exported in the LR Book module as 8-bit color JPEGs. This may cause banding with a wider gamut profile, but that should be apparent when reviewing the exported book PDF. Here are some comments from Blurb concerning using Blurbs 'PDF to Book' workflow, which is similar to what I just described: From Me: My Workflow Details: My objective is to process all images in LR4 and then export them as 300 dpi, ProPhoto RGB profile, 16 bit TIFF images for layout in InDesign using Blurb's InDesign plugin (Blurb Book Creator CS6 v2.0.2.34d8). I will soft proof the placed images inside InDesign using its 'Proof Colors' tool and the Blurb_ICC_Profile.icc profile. Once the InDesign layout is complete I will do the RGB to CMYK Blurb_ICC_Profile conversion during the export to PDF process using the Blurb PDF X-3 Export Preset v1-1. Blurb's Resonse: Response Via Email(David) - 07/18/2012 Using InDesign and our Blurb InDesign Plug-in does mean you're using the PDF to Book Workflow. This is because your InDesign files will ultimately be exported/uploaded as PDF files. Regarding, "Once the InDesign layout is complete I would like to do the RGB to CMYK Blurb_ICC_Profile conversion during the export to PDF process":   Unfortunately, there is no option for this and it's actually unnecessary during the export process. Our printers convert and process all images as CMYK using the Blurb ICC Color Profile, so even if you upload/export them with an RGB color profile, they'll be converted to CMYK for the production process. My Response: Customer By Email - 07/19/2012 05:10 AM Thanks for the explanation David. It sounds like I can just upload the PDF file using my ProPhoto RGB profiled PDF, but I would prefer to do the conversion from ProPhoto RGB to Blurb ICC CMYK profile. This way I can see the results before uploading the file to Blurb. Can I use the Blurb PDF X-3 Export Preset v1-1 with Output > Color Conversion to Destination > Blurb CC profile, and then upload the PDF file myself? If so please advise where I should upload the file on the Blurb website. Blurb's Response: Response Via Email(David) - 07/20/2012 03:49 PM Hi Todd, If you do end up exporting your PDFs with the workflow you're referring to, you can upload your files here: http://www.blurb.com/make/pdf_to_book IMHO there's no reason why Adobe and Blurb couldn't work together so ProPhoto RGB 16-bit images can be used in the book PDF that gets uploaded (or exported!) to Blurb's website. Blurb then handles the CMYK conversion using full-gamut 16-bit images and not clipped sRGB 8-bit images. ... View more

web-weaver wrote: Within reason the Blurb-printed colors match what I see on screen. Within reason means that you have to expect some color changes since not all colors that you see on screen can be printed. In my recent book the most notable color shift was from a turquoise (think a lovely blue-turquoise of an iceberg) to a darker turquoise-green. Blue-turquoise (i.e. deep blue-green) is the predominant color area that falls outside of sRGB gamut. I'm guessing if you sent the same images to Blurb with conversion from ProPhoto to the Blurb.icc CMYK profile the color would be a lot closer. Here's my results using InDesign with the Blurb ID plugin and ProPhotoRGB placed images. The images were converted to the Blurb.icc generic profile using Blurbs Export to PDF X-3 preset from inside InDesign CS6. The below is a ProPhotoRGB profiled JPEG. Click on image, right click, save, and open in LR or PS to see the full gamut. Only the two blue patches on the last two rows are rendered slightly off-color, but notice they are not darker as web-weaver experienced. On the left side is a CCPP image placed in the Blurb book on standard paper and on the right side is the actual CCPP. ... View more

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. ... View more

Thank you Jao for testing and confirming this is a Mavericks OS X issue. ... View more

So it's still a mystery why LR has the issue and PS doesn't. What about other color managed applications or viewers, do they exhibit the issue? Since the differences observed appear to be subjective try downloading the blacktest.png at the link in post #16. Then follow the instructions in post #20 to measure the actual screen patch values for each application. Do a screen capture with your OS X 10.9 system using LR, PS and at least one other color manged app or viewer and compare the darkest patch values in question. On my Windows 7 system the patches are virtually identical in all applications, including LR Library and Develop. ... View more

There are numerous posts concerning display issues after upgrading to Mavericks OS X 10.9 (see below). After reading these posts it appears Apple has done something to the graphics drivers that raises the color saturation level and increases contrast. Why LR has this issue and PS doesn't is still a mystery. My guess is that PS isn't affected because it's using Open GL for creating the display output data (LR does not use Open GL). It's pretty clear to me this is an Apple OS X issue and not LR. https://discussions.apple.com/message/23495418#23495418 http://apple.slashdot.org/story/13/10/22/225215/os-x-109-mavericks-review "Basically, the sRGB spec is no longer sRGB, and colour managed applications that use ColorSync are completely hosed. Almost everything is more saturated then it should be. Towers of bug reports have been filed on this alone and absolutely nobody has received a response from Apple, which makes me think it's some retarded "stylistic choice" of theirs to literally try and make the OS "look better" (it doesn't)." http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1651041 "A lot of icons in and throughout Mavericks (including icons in the Finder and icons in System Preferences) are rendering "darker" then normal. You can actually screenshot this and it'll show up. I've attached an example of this from the iTunes icon- 10.9 is on the right, 10.8 is on the left." http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1649988&highlight=saturation "Yes, they have adjusted the default saturation level. This seems hard coded as but I actually prefer it as it makes thing "pop" more." ... View more

You can measure the screen values to determine the actual difference. Do two screen captures in LR (Library and Develop) with the Lagom downloaded blacktest.png file. 1) Paste or open each screen capture in PS and 'Assign Profile' with your current monitor profile. 2) Then 'Convert to Profile' using sRGB profile Destination Color Space. 3) Open the original Lagom downloaded blacktest.png file in PS (values are 100% correct). Use the PS Eydropper tool with Sample Size of 11x11 tool to measure the "average" patch RGB values. On my Windows 7 system the patch difference between the LR Library and Develop screen captures is no more than ±1 level, with the Library module about 1 level lower (i.e. darker) on some patches. This is a very small difference, which was only visible using an AB overlay comparison in PS. ... View more

Try the Black Level test pattern at Lagom: http://www.lagom.nl/lcd-test/img/blacktest.png Right-click on the image and Save it. No profile is assigned, but it's sRGB. Inside LR I can see the patches all the way down to patch Level 1. Check it in both the Library and Develop modules and inside PS. On my Windows 7 system with LR5.3. Message was edited by: trshaner Added screenshot ... View more

As you have already mentioned the issue does not occur on Windows systems. When I compare the image in LR5.3 and PS CS6 on my Windows 7 system they are identical. First suspect would be the Graphics drivers and it looks like there is an OS X 10.9.1 update that addresses graphics driver issues: http://www.tonymacx86.com/400-os-x-10-9-1-update.html ...and an OS X 10.9.2 update in the works that also includes graphics drivers updates: http://www.macrumors.com/2013/12/19/apple-seeds-first-os-x-10-9-2-build-to-developers/ You can report this as a problem here: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family There is nothing currently posted here with your issue. ... View more

Just clarifying what "used to be" in LR (PV2010) and what "is now" in LR5 (PV2012) for reducing glare, and specifically how to use it. The Highlights slider works "backwards" from the Recovery slider! Probably should also mention the Radial filter tool is new in LR5 and can also be used to apply additional -Highlights to selective areas for glare reduction. ... View more

Bee34 wrote: There used to be a slider that reduced apparent glare in light-color objects and thus brought out detail. How is that done in LR 5????? The slider you are referring to was called 'Recovery' in PV2010 and now is called Highlights in PV2012. Setting Highlights to negative values recovers detail in areas that have "glare." You can apply additional Highlights and Exposure to specific areas with glare using the Local Adjustment Brush tool. ... View more

What file types exhibit this problem? Can you post one  to a file download site? Adobe has indicated there are no issues with Mavericks OS X 10.9 when running the latest builds of CC and CS6 apps http://helpx.adobe.com/x-productkb/global/mac-os-mavericks-compatability.html?PID=7221644 Are you running LR5.3 Final? http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=5692 ... View more

Thanks John. I used to do sales tracking using Excel and the numerical data fields pulled in from the company's database program always had to be converted from text to numbers to do numerical sorts. So the issue is that the LR catalog database fields are text items, which can't be sorted numerically internal to LR. Adobe Bridge is not a relational database application so numerical fields can be correctly sorted, but there are serious speed tradeoffs when sorting on a large number of image files. http://thelightroomlab.com/2010/02/adobe-photoshop-lightroom-vs-the-adobe-bridge/ So we still don't have an Adobe application or plugin that can do "numerical sorts" on a large number of image files in a reasonable amount of time. I'm sure SQLite has the capability! ... View more

Did anyone try johnbeardy's ListView plugin? ... View more

My workaround for numerous LR shortcomings like this is to simply work with Adobe Bridge, PS and LR all open. The workflow is not as cumbersome as it sounds and Bridge let's me find and catalog ALL my digital assets, not just Raw, JPEG, TIFF and Ping file types. Metadata changes made in Bridge can be updated in the LR catalog to keep track of and use them their as well. ... View more

All that said I am a firm believer in keeping image files on the memory for temporary protection. See this post for more details: http://forums.adobe.com/message/5154906#5154906 ... View more