Which profile to use throughout the process

I'm still having some printer problems with magenta casts and color shifts. I use a Nikon D2h and was using the sRGB shooting mode but after reading a few articles have switched to RGB in camera. I calibrated my monitor with Color Plus and have a profile generated from the calibration. My question is should I still set the camera mode to RGB then set Photoshop to RGB or the Color Plus profile. The same question for the printer should I set it to RGB or Color Plus.

Choice 1. Camera RGB Photoshop RGB Printer RGB

Choice 2. Camera RGB Photoshop Color Plus Printer Color Plus

Thanks any help will be appreciated........Jim C

Jim-
Great question. And always a confusing subject. Color management is one of those things that makes me more confused the more I think about it.

First of all, set your Color Settings (In the Edit dropdown) in Photoshop so that your colorspace is Adobe RGB, and check the "Ask When Opening" "Profile Mismatch" box. The Color Plus profile is ust for the monitor and will operate in the background. As long as it loads when you start up your computer, you don't have to worry about it. I amd a little concerned about the word "Printer" in the profile name. How did you create the profile? You didn't have to print anything did you? You should have used a device that attaches to your monitor. That's the correct way to do it.

I'm not exactly sure what the "Camera RGB" profile is. But I would bet it's the same thing as Adobe RGB. Adobe RGB is the standard for a basic, generic, pro camera profile. sRGB is used for consumer stuff and Web display. It would be worthwhile to figure out if the Camera RGB profile is the same as Adobe RGB. If it is the same, it should open right up in Photoshop. If it's different, or the names don't match, then you might get the profile mismatch dialogue box. Even if it's the same, the name might be a problem. My EOS 1D tags all files as sRGB, even if you've got the camera set to Adobe RGB. I have to re-tag the files. Maybe someone here or on the Digital SLRs forum can tell you more about your camera. I don't know any specific details about color management with the Nikons.

Basically, you want your camera and Photoshop to use the same profile. That way you'll be seeing your files correctly. Any other profiles will be output device profiles. You can also have a camera profile made specifically for your camera. I'm honestly not sure how you'd handle that. The profile would be so that you'd be seeing files from your camera corrected for the specific characteristics of your sensor and lenses. I know you'd want to continue to view images in the Adobe RGB colorspace. But I'm not exactly sure what you'd do with the specific camera profile.

Does that make sense to you? Does it help? I threw in some extra stuff there. I hope it didn't confuse you. I'm hopeing someone else will add their thoughts and experience. Adobe RGB for the camera and Adobe RGB for Photoshop and you're golden.

Thanks John, your answer was very clear and helped a lot to get my setup where it needs to be. I'll keep the Color Plus profile for my monitor but use (adobe) RGB with Photoshop, the camera and the printer. The camera RGB profiles I was talking about are the three selections the D2h gives you as a color space to shoot in. Nikon has two logical choices with sRGB and Adobe RGB and has added a special derivative of the sRGB for outdoor (nature) photographers that uses a slightly increased green saturation similar to Fuji slide film. It just added to the confusion on system calibration/output for me.
When I referred to the printer profile I have a choice of the default that comes with the printer (Epson 1270) or any of the many profile choices I seem to have collected. With the printer you can plug in any profile you want. That's where I wondered if I should use the Color Plus profile with everything or a combination. I does make more sense to use RGB in the camera and carry it through to Photoshop and the printer. Thanks again for the help I was beginning to wonder if anyone was going to answer. I had looked at quite a few sites on the web and couldn't get a clear picture of how to set it up. I'll post my results after I change the settings.

As an aside, if you shoot RAW, you can change the color space in software. In ACR at least, you can see the histogram change as you switch from space to space. It's weird, the Adobe RGB seems to keep the histogram much more evenly distributed, but the other spaces tend to push it way to the left...I guess that's part of the difference between Adobe and the others...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DownByFive

As an aside, if you shoot RAW, you can change the color space in software.

---

While this may be true, shooting Adobe RGB in the camera will insure you capture the most color information. If you shoot a smaller gamut space in the camera, say sRGB, some color info will be lost (not recorded).

In this case, it won't matter if you then switch over to ARGB in PS. The missing color info cannot be recovered...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asylum Steve

While this may be true, shooting Adobe RGB in the camera will insure you capture the most color information. If you shoot a smaller gamut space in the camera, say sRGB, some color info will be lost (not recorded).

In this case, it won't matter if you then switch over to ARGB in PS. The missing color info cannot be recovered...

---

The best way is to shoot in Adobe RGB, work in Adobe RGB, and then convert to the printing profile when you are done and save with a printing code. I save my files with the following nomenclature... LC00001_p.tiff where the p = print ready.

If you convert to SRGB, like Steve said, you can never get that color gamut back. You may never notice it because printing gamuts are even smaller, but it's good to have the original file with as much color as possible. Mitsubishi just came out with an Adobe RGB monitor so someday our sRgb monitors may be obsolete. So for future use keep the widest gamut possible.

Cheers,
Loren

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Asylum Steve

While this may be true, shooting Adobe RGB in the camera will insure you capture the most color information. If you shoot a smaller gamut space in the camera, say sRGB, some color info will be lost (not recorded).

In this case, it won't matter if you then switch over to ARGB in PS. The missing color info cannot be recovered...

---

I didn't even think about that...Good observation. I do always shoot in Adobe RGB though. Good thing I wasn't shooting in sRGB and then converting it to Adobe, thinking that it was just a software thing...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DownByFive

It's weird, the Adobe RGB seems to keep the histogram much more evenly distributed, but the other spaces tend to push it way to the left...I guess that's part of the difference between Adobe and the others...

---

That doesn't sound right. Changing color spaces shouldn't change the exposure, which is what's happening if the histogram is moving. Are you viewing in other color spaces, assigning another profile, or converting the file to different profile? What you're describing might happen if you assign or convert to a new profile - especially if it's an incorrect profile. But I don't think the histogram should change if you switch the color space or convert to a new profile.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by racingpinarello

Mitsubishi just came out with an Adobe RGB monitor so someday our sRgb monitors may be obsolete.

---

http://www.necmitsubishi.com/product...assification=1

Ouch!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Photo-John

That doesn't sound right. Changing color spaces shouldn't change the exposure, which is what's happening if the histogram is moving. Are you viewing in other color spaces, assigning another profile, or converting the file to different profile? What you're describing might happen if you assign or convert to a new profile - especially if it's an incorrect profile. But I don't think the histogram should change if you switch the color space or convert to a new profile.

---

The difference seems to be most evident between Adobe RGB and ColorMatch RGB, but you can also see it with Adobe and sRGB, though it's not nearly as dramatic. If I convert straight to Tiff, without converting the color profile, the non-Adobe RGB images are noticeably darker...But maybe I'm an idiot in my understanding of color spaces, which is very possible...Here's some examples of ACR when I scroll through the color space choices...Sorry the pics aren't more legible...

Of course, this business is purely academic, since I don't shoot or work in anything but Adobe RGB, I just found it interesting...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DownByFive

Here's some examples of ACR when I scroll through the color space choices.

---

Ok. It's not what I thought. This looks fine. I thought that you were saying it actually pushed the whole histogram over. That would mean it was actually changing the exposure. In these examples it looks like it's doing exactly what I'd expect, compressing the color information, but not actually changing the exposure. The left side isn't actually moving, it's only the overall graph of information.

You're right about ColorMatch RGB - it is most noticeable there. I forgot what that color space is for. Isn't it for print proofiing? I'm surprised that there isn't more obvious compression in the sRGB colorspace. I actually doesn't look too bad. For anyone who's confused or new to this - I'm not actually looking at the images - just the graphed, histogram display.

Thanks for posting the examples. That's very helpful.

I tried everything and now everything I print come out with a heavy green tint. I used the Color Plus profile for the monitor. I set Photoshop and the Epson 1270 printer to Adobe RGB which is the same profile in the camera. When I bring up the picture in Photoshop it looks great on screen but after spending hours trying every possibility I could think of the prints are still green. I'm going to post my problem on any other forums I can find an answer but if anyone here has any idea's they would be appreciated....Jim

By the way John I tried the setup you suggested with no change. I think it might be a printer setting problem because everything looks good up to viewing in Photoshop.

The printer profile isn't the same thing as your color space. Your color space should be Adobe RGB, but you should either use the provided profiles/drivers for printing, or get custom printer profiles made. Adobe RGB will not print right, as you've discovered.

I got a little more info on the web and It seems your right. I probably have mixed or conflicting profiles. I have some instructions about how it's suppose to be and I'll try to set it up and test again. I'll let you know how it turns out.

I've had recent experience here, and I've come to a pretty good point (though it's not perfect, and I think I still have some to learn). I use a PC, and print from Photoshop, and I have an Epson 1280 printer. Here is my flow, assembled after some online reading and lots of experimenting, along with comments:

1. Monitor is periodically calibrated using Spyder hardware

2. camera (canon digital rebel) is set to the Adobe color space.

3. Photoshop (PS) is always set to work in Adobe color space, and always asks to switch a photo to Adobe color space if it already isn't in it.

4. I shoot RAW images always, of course.

5. When printing, I use the File -> Print with Preview option. On the pop-up form, use Page Setup to adjust for paper size and orientation. The Source Space is set to Document which should be Adobe RGB (1998). The Print Space ideally uses the profile of the paper that is being used (e.g., I use the Hahnemuehle Photo Rag almost exclusively at this point, and I point to a profile that I purchased online at Inkjet Mall). Intent is set to Perceptual. Black Point is checked on.

6. Press Print when ready

7. On the print form, set to your printer of course. Click on the Properties button.

8. On the properties form, set Ink to Color. Mode is Custom. Click on Advanced.

9. On Advance form, choose No Color Adjustment under Color Management. The Media Type is irrelevant (leave as default). Print Quality should be Best Photo for final versions. Uncheck all boxes (High speed, flip horizontal, edge smoothing) for best overall quality.

===========================================

Following this flow essentially allows PS to manage the color by defeating the crappy default epson driver. I hated the epson driver and had serious reservations at first about the printer until I became educated and implemented the flow detailed above. Now I am fairly happy, and use the printer for some of my color portfolio work (but never an exhibit - always use a custom printer if you can afford it. Despite what the websites say, it is worth it. I know from first-hand experience).

Also, I advise you to choose a high quality paper. Epson paper is OK - meaning, not too good. Hahnemuehle is excellent, though pricey. I prefer Photo Rag 308g after experimenting with a sampler pack available at B&H Photo. I haven't tried any of the other expensive paper brands yet, but I plan to in the future as finances and time allow :).

Good luck!

-Stew

A few more comments I forgot above :)

1. In addition to Photo Rag paper, the William Turner is excellent too. A good weight is 310g. Heck, all of the Hahnemuehle papers I've tried so far are great, it's more a matter of personal perference. I highly recommend you try the sampler pack, and print to the different paper types. You will be surprised how much the paper color (various shades of white), thickness, and quality (rough, smooth, etc) can affect the presentation of the photo.

2. After using the flow I described, here are my observations of the print. Overall, the colors are fairly accurate, though a little too saturated looking. What are supposed to be subtle transitions between similar shades can sometimes be a little too quick when printed. Finally, the image is, overall, a tad "darker" than on my screen. Overall the quality is acceptable for a portfolio, but just too far off for professional purposes IMHO.

Of course, the screen is a medium that emits light while paper reflects light. I suppose getting a perfect match between the two media is impossible, but a very close match of course can be obtained. I have found that using a professional printer who is super focused on monitor and printer calibrations, inks and ink quality, monitor quality, lighting conditions, etc will give you that 5-10% quality increase over your epson, which can be crucial. However, printing at home: my Hahnemuehle paper is about $2 a sheet and probably a few cents for the ink per print. My professional printer costs about $35 for a 11x14 print (about $20 for a proof). You do the math :).

Cheers, Stew