"Should I output a Munsell chart at Walgreens and calibrate the monitor to visually match the output? Do you think the output would differ much whenever the paper or inks are refilled?"
I work at a photo lab that uses an Agfa D-lab.2. My suggestion is to calibrate your monitor to the print you are receiving. This is a chemical printing process and no inks are involved. Paper and chemistry is alway changing so you will have to recalibrate your monitor at times. I would also suggest go to a more professional lab than Walmart/Walgreens, someplace that does only photo processing and not hundreds of other things.
wade
Because of our workflow, we do not use ICC profiles (the press facility does that when imaging plates) so I’m a bit rusty when it comes to color profiles.
????
How can you not colour manage and the press facility do any colour management worth more than a woodn nickel? If they don’t know what your color space is, how can they work from there?
As for the Frontiers:
Frontiers assume the sRGB profile when dealing with any file, so convet you r files to sRGB before sending them to print.
The Frontier’s calibration is innacurate enough (the thing is designed to be a minilab, not a proofer) that if you try to make a custom profile on any given day, it will be off a few weeks later…
You may also want to check out "Real Workd Color Management" for more info
I would also suggest go to a more professional lab than Walmart/Walgreens, someplace that does only photo processing and not hundreds of other things.
I dunno. It’s kinda nice being able to buy lawn furniture, a bottle of wine, and tennis shoes all while you get your prints processed. 🙂
I am not a pro photographer, I am a graphic artist. My camera is a lower-end one and this is purely for personal 4×6" prints. I would certainly go to a higher end lab if the photo dictated such. I simply want to get expected colors and the best output I can.
As far as "work" files, we send PDFs to several large-run web publication houses across the US. They request that no ICC profiles be embedded, as they apply them at output. We use a monitor working space when color correcting images and are almost always satisfied with the final printed product. We will be switching workflow to InDesign shortly and I am investigating more on color management. PageMaker’s CMS rots.
And I like shopping for beer and sarcastic greeting cards while my prints run 🙂
"I dunno. It’s kinda nice being able to buy lawn furniture, a bottle of wine, and tennis shoes all while you get your prints processed."
As long as the person from lawn furniture isn’t the one processing your prints.
We charge 3¢ more for 4×6 prints than Walgreens. I think it’s more than worth it.
wade
Wade, is your lab a chain in the US? I’m about 45 minutes away from Tampa, FL and my choices are few. I suppose researching my options would be warranted, though, if the cost difference is that minimal. Like I said, I’ve only had one batch printed so far and I would like to get on the right track with my new "toy."
Oh no – another one from TamBay – St Petersburg FL myself.
Really, Jason? I lived in St Pete for 25 yrs before getting married and moving to the southern boondocks.
Well, you’re a bit younger than I so I probably wouldn’t know you. St Pete High alumni, "Swigwam" beachbum, worked in Clearwater.
cool. we’ll get back to this when you get your ‘profiles for digital prints’ issue sorted.
Actually I work at a true mom and pop business in Orlando, FL. I’m not really suggesting to go to a large real expensive professional lab but a lab that specializes in photography and not cold releif products or produce or tires. check out your local area i’m sure there will be plenty of places you can go. take a cd with a couple of images and have them printed, and see how the quality looks. talk to the employees and find out how knowledgeable(sp?) they are.
wade
They request that no ICC profiles be embedded, as they apply them at output.
In other words they’re shooting blind.
We apply profiles to all the files we output, and if the customer doesn’t embed his/her profile, it’s a crapshoot.
I cannot defend a company I do not work for, but as one of the largest book/magazine publications houses with 40 locations worldwide, I’m sure there’s a good reason that they request color management off. Imagine what would happen if the editorial content had one profile, and each of a hundred advertisers in the magazine each had their own profiles too! That would be a color nightmare. And by going computer-to-plate, there is very little dot gain compared to film-to-plate.
Imagine what would happen if the editorial content had one profile, and each of a hundred advertisers in the magazine each had their own profiles too!
They would have to _convert_ to the right profile That’s what color management is about.
That would be a color nightmare.
Sandy, it’s quite obvious you do not know what color management is about or you would never have written the above statement.
Start reading Real World Color Management, then get back to us.
I began my post admitting that I have little experience with color management. This is not the issue of my post at all. I want suggestions on how to get the best results from a digital photo printer, not to be chastised for the requested workflow of such a mammoth printer.
I was not chastising you, just stating that what they are saying is that they are NOT colour managing files. That’s what "In other words they’re shooting blind. " meant.
Your statement that "Imagine what would happen if the editorial content had one profile, and each of a hundred advertisers in the magazine each had their own profiles too! That would be a color nightmare" shows either a clear lack of understanding, or a lack of knowledge, this is not meant in an insulting or derogatory way, it is a statement of fact. I also provided a solution for you to remediate this situation.
As for help on profiling with the frontiers, check out my post No. 2
If you need more info, ask questions, I (and others) will be happy to help
Rene, I did read your earlier post "Frontiers assume the sRGB profile" which reiterates what I read in the Dry Creek link above. It seems I should edit, then soft proof using the Frontier profile, and according to Dry Creek, "Do not embed the profile in the saved file. Frontier and Noritsu printers ignore embedded profiles." I guess at this stage I will have some Munsell charts output to see how the colors compare with my screen so I know better what to expect. It seems that some posters agree with my concern that paper and chemistry change can alter the color (hopefully only slightly) and that a more experienced photo lab will probably give more consistent results. I do appreciate all the input.
I am trying to understand color mgmt better and am reading the PS Bible. I will also see if I can get ahold of the other book you mentioned. But answer this scenario for me so I can understand this: I send a hi-res PDF (from PageMaker) to the printer of a magazine page. The editorial images I placed use the printer’s preferred ICC profile. Also on the page are placed PDFs from advertisers that originated from, say Quark docs, each with placed/embedded images with different ICC profiles. If no profiles are saved on anything, isn’t it possible for the proper profiles to be used when the imposition software images the plates?
If you can get the output profile from the lab/printer – I would think a best case scenario would be to soft proof with that profile.
"Also on the page are placed PDFs from advertisers that originated from, say Quark docs, each with placed/embedded images with different ICC profiles. If no profiles are saved on anything, isn’t it possible for the proper profiles to be used when the imposition software images the plates?"
Most RIP software can be set to either ignore or honor embedded profiles. If it does honor the profile, it uses that profile as the input profile then recalculates using thier output profile.
So depending on how they’re set up, embedded may or may not make a difference.
As far as no embedded profiles, then it will use whatever default input profile is set at the RIP. So that may or may not be a good thing as well.
Sandy,
If no profiles are saved on anything, isn’t it possible for the proper
profiles to be used when the imposition software images the plates?<<
The purpose of an embedded profile is to tell the receiving application what colour space the file was created in. When that is known, conversion to another colour space is straight forward, but it’s a bit like translating from French to English – you need to know BOTH languages, and knowing only one is no help whatsoever. With an un-tagged file, the colour space that file is in is unknown and therefore it CANNOT be translated accurately into any other colour space.
Maybe this will help:
The numbers in an image file do not represent specific colours. For example, 100R, 0G, 0B just means "make the brightest, most saturated red you can". It doesn’t mean a specific SHADE of red, and the red that will result will depend upon the capabilities of the device the data is being sent to (usually either a monitor or printer of some sort).
Only when coupled with an ICC profile that describes the ‘colour space’ do those numbers represent a specific shade.
If it helps you in any way here is my short "idiot’s guide to CM" <g>
There is data in a file. That data doesn’t represent specific colours UNTIL the colour space is stated (embedded profile or assign profile).
The working profile sets up the colour space you are working in, and the embedded profile allows the CM engine to convert the file data values to your working space values so those values still represent the same colour as originally indicated by the file data and embedded profile.
The monitor profile alters that data from your working space on the fly to allow the monitor to display the colours represented by the data within the working space profile.
When you print, the output profile alters the data to allow the printer to reproduce the colours represented by the data and the image profile.
The monitor profile effectively drops out of the equation when you print.
Provided the ‘translation’ from working space to monitor is correct AND the translation from working space to output device is correct, the print will match the monitor.
However, only if the translation from embedded profile to working space is also correct will the monitor and print also match the original file intentions.
For a fuller explanation, spend some 15 minutes or so over at
http://www.computer-darkroom.com The info there is really for Photoshop, but it is equally applicable to Illustrator from version 9 on
Thanks Len. I’ll add that to my reading list. I still don’t know why the press facility prefers no profiles, but with computer-to-plate imaging and virtually no dotgain, I’ve always been happy with the final printed colors.
Out of curiousity, how would the device react to a PDF page with multiple profiles from placed images and ads?
Sandy,
The RIP should handle each profile as it comes across it and convert to the device colour space without any problems.
Len,
IMO that´s wrong.
According to the tutorials distparm.pdf and acrohelp.pdf in C:\Distiller\Help\Enu (or so):
Acrobat Distiller uses just ONE set of color profiles:
for RGB, CMYK and Grayscale.
This means:
The files have to be prepared deliberately for the final CMYK process.
According to the ISO-Standards, the printable PDFs have to be made for direct printing without any changes.
This doesn´t exclude the proof printing, but it´s not only reasonable but also necessary that all CMYK files are made for the same intended process (the different Quark components will probably cause confusion).
The RIP interprets arbitrary file formats as defined, but for PDFs the embedded profiles for single images are not valid. The global settings are valid (the three profiles).
If somebody should be interested then I will proof my statements by the respective documents.
Best regards –Gernot Hoffmann
Gernot,
You may well be right as I haven’t delved too deeply into this, but I would have thought that with distiller settings set to Allow PostScript to override Adobe PDF settings, (and possibly Leave colour unchanged, although that shouldn’t be necessary with the afore-mentioned settings) that embedded profiles in a PostScript file should be retained when distilling, and if they are, the RIP should accommodate them.
However, I think we would need the input of an Acrobat guru such as Aandi Inston to get a definitive answer on this matter. I’ll ask him his opinion….
Len,
I´m referring to page 235 of the doc acrohelp.pdf.
As I understand the explanations there is really
only one set of profiles, as defined by the CSF file
(which can be produced by saving the color settings
e.g. in Photoshop. Of course you know this – you had
it often explained to others).
I don´t know whether the restriction is stillvalid for
Distiller 6 (my explanations are valid for up to 5).
On the other hand: I had done some tests using image
files with embedded profiles for PDFs (with color
management properly enabled). Even then Photoshop
doesn´t warn for profile mismatches.
The user of a RIP doesn´t get a reasonable feedback
about the internal state. Especially this is a good
reason to simplify the workflow:
Convert everything for the final CMYK process.
Then we have two alternatives:
A. Export to PDF either with
Settings File None / Leave colors Unchanged
B. Use the same CSF file as in Photoshop (or Indesign,
Illustrator) and define
Settings File …CSF.
Version B would enable the reader (service provider) to
show a reasonable monitor preview.
For version A the reader has to guess about the CMYK
space, or he gets the information explicitly by the
sender.
As already explained: ISO 15930 says clearly: CMYK values are ready for printing – no cross conversion is allowed.
By the way: CMYK-CMYK cross-conversions will cause big
problems:
eventually wrong black-point mapping and replacement of
K-only gray by rich black.
I´m using Best Colorproof, but I can´t say that everything is clear or logical …
Best regards –Gernot Hoffmann
Gernot,
You really can’t compare Acrobat 5 and 6 where CMS is concerned.
6 now has preflighting. soft-proofing, viewing of colour separations and the ability to save as PDF/X-1a and PDF/X-3 compliant files with validation. Colour handling is much improved from previous versions
Len,
no program in the world can produce correct PDF/X-1a files if the ingredients are wrong. More about in the appendix.
Back to the OP´s questions:
1. Calibrate Monitor by instrument.
2. Convert everything for the intended CMYK space.
3. Use Service Provider´s (printer´s) Profile, but don´t be disappointed if the printed results are bad. Especially laser printers are not reliable.
Best regards –Gernot Hoffmann
Appendix:
Here is the essence of
ISO 15930-1, Complete exchange using CMYK data (PDF/X-1 and PDF/X-1a) for the case "intended for final printing"
Preseparated docs are not permitted (these consist only of separations) Color spaces DeviceCMYK,DeviceGray,Separation,DeviceN
Indexed,Pattern use these color spaces as well
Separation or DeviceN for CMYK, Spot and for non-colors (varnish..) Fonts are embedded if not restricted by law
OPI comments are embedded
Previews are included
Compression is allowed (PDF methods JPEG, Flate, Runlength, CCITT) No LZW compression in EPS or DCS files.
Screening in EPS or DCS is allowed but rather complex.
Trapping: the state is indicated by the Trapped key (done or not done). Bleed: includes printed area without printer marks
The PDF is complete:
-all PDF sources
-all OPI files
-all print elements, properly prepared for a SINGLE intended printing condition.
All this is partly my interpretation. Especially it is IMO prohibited to include ICC profiles for the purpose "convert given CMYK data into other CMYK space". There is no need to embed ANY profile.
Use CMYK for vector graphics
Use only CMYK images
Don´t compress images
Don’t use already screened EPS or DCS
Use only "simple" EPS without hidden features
State clearly "trapped" or not "trapped" State clearly which fonts are not embedded
These rules are IMO anyway recommended.
Then it should work !
In cases of doubt: ISO standard is valid.
Len and Gernot,
You guys are WAY over my head, and I’ve been a graphic artist for 20+ years and know much more about software than most. Listening to some of you in the Photoshop forum reminds me how much more can be learned.
i "All this is partly my interpretation. Especially it is IMO prohibited to include ICC profiles for the purpose "convert given CMYK data into other CMYK space". There is no need to embed ANY profile."
This sounds more in line with what the press facility has told us, but I never delved in it too deeply.
I seem to have my answer on my original post. I have downloaded the Frontier’s profile and will softproof with it. I’ll also have a color chart output to see how it compares. Wish I had a monitor calibrator. I’m stuck with Adobe Gamma and the old eagle eyes.
