Am I getting closer to understanding color management?

LA
Posted By
Loren Amelang
Jun 29, 2007
Views
773
Replies
14
Status
Closed
Just used a "Spyder2" on my monitor. At the end of the guided process, it shows the "PDI Test Image" and lets you toggle between "color managed" and "not color managed". In "color managed" some yellows and reds are dramatically more intense. They don’t explain why, but it makes you think you’ve accomplished something.

The Microsoft Color Control Panel Applet for Windows XP says the profile the Spyder made contains a gamut table. By using its Devices tab, selecting Displays, and highlighting either the new profile or the display vendor’s default profile (or sRGB), then clicking Set As Default and then Apply, I can switch between them "on the fly". Very little changes. The gamut viewer shows the new profile with a bit less green and blue range, but about the same shape as the default.

(I found several web sources saying one couldn’t do this, at least not without restarting Windows, but try it with a radical profile and you will easily see that the video LUT is changed when you click Apply, and displays from both color managed and non color managed applications are affected identically.)

So the dramatic boost in reds and yellows was not due to the graphics lookup table. Displaying the PDI Test Image side-by-side in (non-color managed viewer) ImageEye and in Photoshop, if I choose to soft proof to "Monitor RGB" the colors are identical. Turn off the Proof Colors option and the Photoshop yellows jump up like they did in the Spyder app. I was never clear what the "Monitor RGB" soft proof was supposed to do – looks like it simply shows you what your image will look like in non color managed apps on your system.

I can also toggle the reds and yellows up and down by viewing the image without proofing in Photoshop, choosing to assign the new monitor profile to the image, and toggling Preview on and off. With the monitor profile assigned to the image, it shows the pale, non-color managed yellows. With Preview off, the yellows jump up. If "Proof Colors" (to "Monitor RGB") is selected, assigning the monitor profile to the image makes no difference.

Apparently the issue here is that Spyder’s PDI Test Image is tagged with AdobeRGB, and looks pale when viewed in Windows’ default sRGB unless it is properly color managed. By using a test image that is not in the native color space, the Spyder2 program shows you the benefit of interpreting the image in its proper color space, not particularly the benefit you just gained by using the spyder hardware.

If I open a completely untagged version of the familiar test image "parrots" into my AdobeRGB default space, and tell Photoshop "don’t color manage", what should be bright yellows (and reds!) match ImageEye with RGB#/Monitor proofing on, and jump way up with Proof Colors disabled.

Aha! Assigning my default AdobeRGB profile while opening parrots gives me the same results as "don’t color manage"! Bright reds and yellows with Proof Colors off. So the same file values interpreted as AdobeRGB _are_ a brighter red/yellow than if they are taken as sRGB…

Assigning sRGB (to numbers that presumably are already sRGB) while opening gives me reds that match ImageEye with Proof Colors on, and very slightly less saturated reds (215 vs 219) with RGB*/Monitor proofing off. I see no difference in "parrots" when swapping between the Spyder profile and stock sRGB at the Windows color control panel, so I wonder what Photoshop is trying to soft proof for me here? Is that maybe the difference between my particular Monitor RGB and the "Windows RGB" choice?

There is one more option – assign sRGB and then convert to AdobeRGB. Now the images match with Proof Colors off, and the RGB/Monitor proofed reds are dramatically darker than ImageEye’s. I understand the images matching – both programs took the image numbers as sRGB values, and Photoshop converted them to look the same as that in its working AdobeRGB space. When I save the parrots with the AdobeRGB tag, ImageEye shows that file with the same darker reds as the Photoshop soft proof.

Of all the questions I was going to ask when I started writing this, only two remain. One is asked above. If I tell PS that sRGB numbers already are AdobeRGB, the reds get dramatically brighter. If I tell it to convert the sRGB to AdobeRGB, and then proof it as it would be shown by an app that assumed sRGB, the reds get dramatically darker. Makes sense. But if I tell PS that sRGB numbers _are_ sRGB, they only match non-color managed sRGB with proofing to Monitor RGB on. Why are they slightly darker or less saturated with proofing off? Not nearly the difference of interpreting them in the wrong color space, but still different.

The other question is why would they call an option "Don’t color manage" when it seems like it should be called "Pretend what you open is already in your PS default space"? When saving an image, the obvious "Don’t color manage" behavior is "don’t add a profile", which leaves the image in the system default space. On opening a file I originally expected "Don’t color manage" would do the reverse – assume all files are in the Windows default sRGB space. Does Photoshop’s behavior maybe make more sense on Macs?

Hoping I’ve begun to understand all this,

Loren

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

RG
Roy G
Jun 29, 2007
"Loren Amelang" wrote in message
Just used a "Spyder2" on my monitor. At the end of the guided process, it shows the "PDI Test Image" and lets you toggle between "color managed" and "not color managed". In "color managed" some yellows and
.Snip

Hi.

You seem to be getting confused between the different Gamuts of sRGB / Adobe RGB, and the purpose of Monitor profiling.

The purpose of Monitor Calibration, (which is the first part of the process when you adjust the Monitor Controls) and of Monitor Profiling, (which is automagically done by the Spyder), is to get your monitor to show the Image Colours as they would be shown on any other Calibrated and Profiled Monitor. That is its SOLE purpose.

If you were very lucky, you could have a Monitor which showed no difference after Calibration and Profiling. It just naturally was correct, or had been accurately calibrated and profiled at the factory. Until you used a Spyder, you would not know that.

The Calibration part will affect all applications, simply because your Monitor Controls are now permanently set that way.

The Spyder Monitor Profile, and even the Generic Profile, will only be used by C.M. aware applications.

When you set Soft proof in PS to "Monitor RGB" you are effectively setting it to "No C.M.".(This is not an exact answer, which is why I said effectively)

Soft Proof is for seeing how your Prints should look after Printing using a Printer Profile.

PS will use your Spyder Monitor Profile only to adjust the colours shown on the screen, and will only do so if that Profile is set as Default in Display Properties.

Your Monitor Profile will not convert sRGB images to Adobe RGB, or any other Working Space.

Images can be tagged with any Working Space Profile, and will be shown correctly within that paricular Colour Gamut, provided that PS is set to the same Working Space.

There will still be differences between the Working Space Profiles, typically Adobe RGB has stronger Reds than sRGB.

This is not a full explanation, because I ain’t no computer expert, but I hope it helps.

Roy G
LA
Loren Amelang
Jun 29, 2007
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:29:29 GMT, "Roy G"
wrote:

"Loren Amelang" wrote in message
Just used a "Spyder2" on my monitor. At the end of the guided process, it shows the "PDI Test Image" and lets you toggle between "color managed" and "not color managed". In "color managed" some yellows and
.Snip

Hi.

You seem to be getting confused between the different Gamuts of sRGB / Adobe RGB,

My confusion started with the Spyder app showing me a color managed view of an AdobeRGB file compared to a non-managed view, and me thinking the change was supposed to be due to profiling.

and the purpose of Monitor profiling.

The purpose of Monitor Calibration, (which is the first part of the process when you adjust the Monitor Controls) and of Monitor Profiling, (which is automagically done by the Spyder), is to get your monitor to show the Image Colours as they would be shown on any other Calibrated and Profiled Monitor. That is its SOLE purpose.

If you were very lucky, you could have a Monitor which showed no difference after Calibration and Profiling. It just naturally was correct, or had been accurately calibrated and profiled at the factory. Until you used a Spyder, you would not know that.

Seems to be the case here.

The Calibration part will affect all applications, simply because your Monitor Controls are now permanently set that way.

The Spyder Monitor Profile, and even the Generic Profile, will only be used by C.M. aware applications.

I disagree. The monitor profile contains a color Look-Up-Table that gets loaded into the graphics card at startup, when the Spyder logo appears on the screen for a moment. Similar to how Adobe Gamma can load a LUT at startup. On a good monitor, you don’t see much change, but on my notebook (which I also Spydered) the change in the Windows display is quite obvious.

When you set Soft proof in PS to "Monitor RGB" you are effectively setting it to "No C.M.".(This is not an exact answer, which is why I said effectively)

Agreed. I was getting caught up in the various ways that is not exact…

Soft Proof is for seeing how your Prints should look after Printing using a Printer Profile.

PS will use your Spyder Monitor Profile only to adjust the colours shown on the screen, and will only do so if that Profile is set as Default in Display Properties.

But I can also select that profile, along with many others, as an option in proof setup. I guess what I’m trying to understand are the interactions involved in "proofing" for using various monitors as the target output device.

I guess accurate color on the web is a lost cause, but being able to see how far off you will be on a typical properly configured Mac or PC seems useful.

Loren
JM
John McWilliams
Jun 29, 2007
Loren Amelang wrote:

I guess accurate color on the web is a lost cause, but being able to see how far off you will be on a typical properly configured Mac or PC seems useful.

Not at all. Many appreciate seeing a good photo with the same colors as the artist/photographer/snapper sees and intends (or not!)


john mcwilliams
RG
Roy G
Jun 30, 2007
"Loren Amelang" wrote in message
On Fri, 29 Jun 2007 01:29:29 GMT, "Roy G"
wrote:

"Loren Amelang" wrote in message
Just used a "Spyder2" on my monitor. At the end of the guided process, it shows the "PDI Test Image" and lets you toggle between "color managed" and "not color managed". In "color managed" some yellows and
.Snip

Hi.

You seem to be getting confused between the different Gamuts of sRGB / Adobe
RGB,

My confusion started with the Spyder app showing me a color managed view of an AdobeRGB file compared to a non-managed view, and me thinking the change was supposed to be due to profiling.
and the purpose of Monitor profiling.

The purpose of Monitor Calibration, (which is the first part of the process
when you adjust the Monitor Controls) and of Monitor Profiling, (which is automagically done by the Spyder), is to get your monitor to show the Image
Colours as they would be shown on any other Calibrated and Profiled Monitor.
That is its SOLE purpose.

If you were very lucky, you could have a Monitor which showed no difference
after Calibration and Profiling. It just naturally was correct, or had been
accurately calibrated and profiled at the factory. Until you used a Spyder,
you would not know that.

Seems to be the case here.

The Calibration part will affect all applications, simply because your Monitor Controls are now permanently set that way.

The Spyder Monitor Profile, and even the Generic Profile, will only be used
by C.M. aware applications.

I disagree. The monitor profile contains a color Look-Up-Table that gets loaded into the graphics card at startup, when the Spyder logo appears on the screen for a moment. Similar to how Adobe Gamma can load a LUT at startup. On a good monitor, you don’t see much change, but on my notebook (which I also Spydered) the change in the Windows display is quite obvious.

When you set Soft proof in PS to "Monitor RGB" you are effectively setting it to "No C.M.".(This is not an exact answer, which is why I said effectively)

Agreed. I was getting caught up in the various ways that is not exact…

Soft Proof is for seeing how your Prints should look after Printing using a
Printer Profile.

PS will use your Spyder Monitor Profile only to adjust the colours shown on
the screen, and will only do so if that Profile is set as Default in Display
Properties.

But I can also select that profile, along with many others, as an option in proof setup. I guess what I’m trying to understand are the interactions involved in "proofing" for using various monitors as the target output device.

I guess accurate color on the web is a lost cause, but being able to see how far off you will be on a typical properly configured Mac or PC seems useful.

Loren

Hi again.

I suspect that you are correct about the Spyder Profile always being used by the Graphic Card, but I am not a Computer Techie, so I am not sure.

The reason that the Spyder showed an Adobe RGB Image, is because most home printers using Inkjets opt to use adobe RGB as their Working Space Profile.

Accurate colour on the Web is not a lost cause, if the Web users are using Calibrated and Profiled Monitors. If their Monitors are not Calibrated then the colours might well be very far off, just as much off as their own image colours will be, but that is their problem.

The fact that sRGB is used for Web Images does not mean that the colours will be off, it just means that the Gamut will be limited.

Proof is not for anticipating how colours will appear on different Monitors.

If those Monitors have been Calibrated and Profiled then the colours will be exactly the same as on your own Calibrated and Profiled Monitor. That is why Calibration and Profiling is used, to eliminate variations between Monitors.

Your Spyder Monitor Profile is specific to your own Monitor, and is designed to rectify any incorrect rendition on your particular Monitor.

If you are using a fairly new Mac Display, then according to the Mac Fans, it should not have needed Calibration and Profiling, because that was done at the Factory. However as it gets older, its colours will slip and it will then need re-doing.

The only reason for using Monitor RGB in Proof, is so that you can estimate how your image MIGHT look for the Non Calibrated and Profiled Web users. BUT you can not know how far off their colours will be, so it is anything but accurate. The majority of them will not even be working at 6500K.

Just have a look at the working monitors on show in any big Computer store, and notice the Colour variations between them.

The real reason for Proof is, as I have already said, for anticipating how your Image will look when Printed.

You set Proof to use your Printer and Paper Profile, or your Printing House Profile, and you can then see how much it changes from the On-Screen Display. It is a bit like comparing a projected Slide with a Print made from that Slide, they will look entirely different.

I hope this helps a bit more.

Roy G
J
Joe
Jul 1, 2007
Loren Amelang wrote:

<snip>
I guess accurate color on the web is a lost cause, but being able to see how far off you will be on a typical properly configured Mac or PC seems useful.

In general, the hardware monitor calibrator just measure the room lighting condition to give the color based on its calculation (that’s about it!). It may not give you the perfect color, the color may not match your printer, or the exact color you want but pretty close to standard, and different calibrator may give little different result etc.. And one of your main job is to adjust your printing color to match or as closest as you can get from the calibrated monitor.

And if you have some issue with displaying then you may have to learn more about RGB and sRGB color space between systems, or between computer and web use etc..
RG
Roy G
Jul 1, 2007
"Joe" wrote in message
Loren Amelang wrote:

<snip>
I guess accurate color on the web is a lost cause, but being able to see how far off you will be on a typical properly configured Mac or PC seems useful.

In general, the hardware monitor calibrator just measure the room lighting condition to give the color based on its calculation (that’s about it!). It may not give you the perfect color, the color may not match your printer, or the exact color you want but pretty close to standard, and different calibrator may give little different result etc.. And one of your main job is to adjust your printing color to match or as closest as you can get from the calibrated monitor.

And if you have some issue with displaying then you may have to learn more about RGB and sRGB color space between systems, or between computer and web use etc..

Eh ???

Roy G
J
Joe
Jul 2, 2007
"Roy G" wrote:

Eh ???

Hmmm
MR
Mike Russell
Jul 2, 2007
"Roy G" wrote in message
"Joe" wrote in message
Loren Amelang wrote:

<snip>
I guess accurate color on the web is a lost cause, but being able to see how far off you will be on a typical properly configured Mac or PC seems useful.

In general, the hardware monitor calibrator just measure the room lighting condition to give the color based on its calculation (that’s about it!). It
may not give you the perfect color, the color may not match your printer, or
the exact color you want but pretty close to standard, and different calibrator may give little different result etc..

It sounds like you are sayng that monitor calibration hardware, such as the Eye One Display or Spyder 2 Pro, measures only ambient light. This is not the case and I’m sure you did not mean to say that. These devices measure light through three or more filters to get a true color reading from patches of color displayed on the monitor during calibration. They can also be used to assess ambient light conditions, but this is a secondary function.

These devices do their job pretty well, and can both adjust the displayed color, by creating a video look-up table that changes the display, and characterize the displayed color, by defining a color profile that describes the colors generated by the monitor. The first function brings the monitor to a known state, and is called calibration, and consists of changing the display via a combination of manual brightness and contrast adjustment, and a software LUT. The second function measures the monitor output, and is called characterization. The end product rolls both of these functions into one by creating a a color profile that also contains a video lookup table.

And one of your main job
is to adjust your printing color to match or as closest as you can get from
the calibrated monitor.

It’s true that many people expect that by calibrating and profiling their monitor will result in a better match to the printed output. This may or may not happen, and it’s a slippery, and expensive slope to start to spend enough money to automate your printed output.

And if you have some issue with displaying then you may have to learn more about RGB and sRGB color space between systems, or between computer and web
use etc..

Or spend some time calibrating your printer, using the manual color controls in the driver. This is actually not that hard to do, provided you have a realistic expectation of how close a match you can achieve, e.g. matching the overall brightness of the image, minimizing any color casts, and getting the saturation and hue reasonably close. This can be done systematically without spending big bucks on calibration hardware.

Mike Russell – www.curvemeister.com
JM
John McWilliams
Jul 2, 2007
Mike Russell wrote:

Or spend some time calibrating your printer, using the manual color controls in the driver. This is actually not that hard to do, provided you have a realistic expectation of how close a match you can achieve, e.g. matching the overall brightness of the image, minimizing any color casts, and getting the saturation and hue reasonably close. This can be done systematically without spending big bucks on calibration hardware.

You can also manually calibrate in Photoshop’s Print with Preview dialogue (up to CS 3 which has a different access).

I wonder how many are aware of that, much less use it. ?


john mcwilliams
J
Joe
Jul 2, 2007
John McWilliams wrote:

Mike Russell wrote:

Or spend some time calibrating your printer, using the manual color controls in the driver. This is actually not that hard to do, provided you have a realistic expectation of how close a match you can achieve, e.g. matching the overall brightness of the image, minimizing any color casts, and getting the saturation and hue reasonably close. This can be done systematically without spending big bucks on calibration hardware.

You can also manually calibrate in Photoshop’s Print with Preview dialogue (up to CS 3 which has a different access).

I wonder how many are aware of that, much less use it. ?

Something is missing and ain’t right here. Cuz Photoshop has always provided software monitor calibrator, and option to use printer profile etc.. *but* it isn’t as simplest or complicate as some ideas given here.

The whole thing has to work together as a team. Example, if you want the print to match the monitor (either exactly or as closest as you can get) then you have to.

– Calibrate your monitor either using the software or hardware calibrator, whatever you think you can get the best calibration. Or if you think you can save BIG BUCK by using the software comes with Photoshop then it’s fine, and if you can’t trust or don’t have the adjusting skill then BIG BUCK is the way to go.

– If you print at hone using inkjet or whatever printer you have, and you have the Printer Profile then you just try to adjust the displaying to match the color of the print.

If you print at some print-lab then check to see if they have the Printer Profile available online, download it and tell Photoshop to use that specific Printer Profile. Then you have several options

– You can have Photoshop displays using Color Space (RGB or sRGB) or Printer Profile. You can toggle this ON/OFF with Ctrl-Y (I think .. or I don’t have Photoshop running to confirm) and you may see some color (usually RED or contrast) looks different between Monitor and Printer Profile.

– And you may have to learn to adjust the color at your end to match the print. And photolab often adjust their printer so you may have to download a newer printer profile. And not all photolabs with exact same printer will give the exact same color, so you have to learn to adjust yours to match theirs (current setting)

I don’t retouch for displaying but printing, sometime I print few hundred photos (can be 300-800+), so I often print few 4×6 to check the current color before sending the rest (especially large print).
RG
Roy G
Jul 3, 2007
"Joe" wrote in message
John McWilliams wrote:

Mike Russell wrote:

Or spend some time calibrating your printer, using the manual color controls
in the driver. This is actually not that hard to do, provided you have a
realistic expectation of how close a match you can achieve, e.g. matching
the overall brightness of the image, minimizing any color casts, and getting
the saturation and hue reasonably close. This can be done systematically
without spending big bucks on calibration hardware.

You can also manually calibrate in Photoshop’s Print with Preview dialogue (up to CS 3 which has a different access).

I wonder how many are aware of that, much less use it. ?

Something is missing and ain’t right here. Cuz Photoshop has always provided software monitor calibrator, and option to use printer profile etc.. *but* it isn’t as simplest or complicate as some ideas given here.
The whole thing has to work together as a team. Example, if you want the print to match the monitor (either exactly or as closest as you can get) then you have to.

– Calibrate your monitor either using the software or hardware calibrator, whatever you think you can get the best calibration. Or if you think you can save BIG BUCK by using the software comes with Photoshop then it’s fine,
and if you can’t trust or don’t have the adjusting skill then BIG BUCK is the way to go.

– If you print at hone using inkjet or whatever printer you have, and you have the Printer Profile then you just try to adjust the displaying to match
the color of the print.

If you print at some print-lab then check to see if they have the Printer Profile available online, download it and tell Photoshop to use that specific Printer Profile. Then you have several options
– You can have Photoshop displays using Color Space (RGB or sRGB) or Printer Profile. You can toggle this ON/OFF with Ctrl-Y (I think .. or I don’t have Photoshop running to confirm) and you may see some color (usually RED or contrast) looks different between Monitor and Printer Profile.

– And you may have to learn to adjust the color at your end to match the print. And photolab often adjust their printer so you may have to download a newer printer profile. And not all photolabs with exact same printer will give the exact same color, so you have to learn to adjust yours to match theirs (current setting)

I don’t retouch for displaying but printing, sometime I print few hundred photos (can be 300-800+), so I often print few 4×6 to check the current color before sending the rest (especially large print).

If you are going to adjust your monitor colours to match either you own Pinter, or Printing House, output then what was the point of using Adobe Gamma to Calibrate the Monitor??

The system you describe will work, BUT it will only work on your own system.

The colours of your Images would be inaccurate if published on the Web, or if copy files were passed on to someone else. You are effectively converting your images to a Printer Profile.

What happens when your Printer dies??

Roy G
J
Joe
Jul 3, 2007
"Roy G" wrote:

<snip>
I don’t retouch for displaying but printing, sometime I print few hundred photos (can be 300-800+), so I often print few 4×6 to check the current color before sending the rest (especially large print).

If you are going to adjust your monitor colours to match either you own Pinter, or Printing House, output then what was the point of using Adobe Gamma to Calibrate the Monitor??

There is no if

1. Adjusting your monitor using either hardware monitor calibrator or software comes with Photoshop (or third party software) whatever you like and have

2. Assuming you get the Printer Profile for your printer. And if the color doesn’t turn out right then you have no other choice but to adjust the COLOR (of the image) to match the color of your printer. Or

– try different INK cartridge or paper see if any will help.

—- And if your monitor doesn’t match printer, then you may want to display using Printer Profile instead of monitor. And because viewing using Printer Profile some color may display very dull, lacking of contrast etc.. (like shining red color for example may display muddy color), so sometime it’s better to TOGGLE between Monitor/Printer.

The system you describe will work, BUT it will only work on your own system.

If you think you are right then be it!

The colours of your Images would be inaccurate if published on the Web, or if copy files were passed on to someone else. You are effectively converting your images to a Printer Profile.

Do I have to agree with you to make you happy? <bg>. I dunno, sometime some of you guys are trying to find an easier way to make thing more difficult … you paying to much attention to small thing to not be able to look at the whole thing.

– Good calibrated monitor means for general use, or should work with most monitors, systems. Or if other has problem with his/her monitor then it’s his/her problem not you.

– Printer Profile, this is pretty much for specific use (printer) *but* most if not all printers use the same rule, so the same photo should work with most if not all printer. Yes, different Printer, different Ink, different Paper etc. may give different result *but* the main color’s should remain or pretty close to the original.

IOW, if you do some research then you may find people are happier with this photolab than that photolab, people like this paper more than that paper, and people like THIS photolab more than THAT because the print is Darker/Lighter/Richer

What happens when your Printer dies??

Hahaha I will give you the printer cord to hang yourself <bg>. Or the printer may die but as long as I am still alive, and other ain’t dying on me etc.. I can buy another printer, and nothing can stop other to continue to use the photo from dead printer.

It seems like you just get a wrong idea .. or blowing up the smallest least important thing to make it much bigger than the most important thing <bg>

Roy G
JM
John McWilliams
Jul 3, 2007
Joe wrote:
"Roy G" wrote:

<snip>
I don’t retouch for displaying but printing, sometime I print few hundred photos (can be 300-800+), so I often print few 4×6 to check the current color before sending the rest (especially large print).

If you are going to adjust your monitor colours to match either you own Pinter, or Printing House, output then what was the point of using Adobe Gamma to Calibrate the Monitor??

There is no if

1. Adjusting your monitor using either hardware monitor calibrator or software comes with Photoshop (or third party software) whatever you like and have

2. Assuming you get the Printer Profile for your printer. And if the color doesn’t turn out right then you have no other choice but to adjust the COLOR (of the image) to match the color of your printer.

This brings us back to the point I made upstream. In the Print dialogue, you choose "Output" and then transfer. There one makes adjustments for that printer, and the original photo is untouched, so that it still looks right on your calibrated monitor.


john mcwilliams
J
Joe
Jul 4, 2007
John McWilliams wrote:

Joe wrote:
"Roy G" wrote:

<snip>
I don’t retouch for displaying but printing, sometime I print few hundred photos (can be 300-800+), so I often print few 4×6 to check the current color before sending the rest (especially large print).

If you are going to adjust your monitor colours to match either you own Pinter, or Printing House, output then what was the point of using Adobe Gamma to Calibrate the Monitor??

There is no if

1. Adjusting your monitor using either hardware monitor calibrator or software comes with Photoshop (or third party software) whatever you like and have

2. Assuming you get the Printer Profile for your printer. And if the color doesn’t turn out right then you have no other choice but to adjust the COLOR (of the image) to match the color of your printer.

This brings us back to the point I made upstream. In the Print dialogue, you choose "Output" and then transfer. There one makes adjustments for that printer, and the original photo is untouched, so that it still looks right on your calibrated monitor.

Of course you can do that *if* you think the original will be used for other, or you think the specific printer is much different than the other (whatever it may be). Or just like when I work on some image and I can’t decide which to keep, and I sometime end up saving 2-3 of them (either soft, sharp, or warmer/cooler color).

About the original, I always burn the original JPG or/and RAW to DVD before start retouching.

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections