The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

LR colorspace for printing?

gsking

New member
Simple question. What colorspace does LR output to the printer? I can select sRGB when I export to JPG, and I can select Prophoto for export to CS4, but no such selection for printing.

I read that it uses some Melissa RGB colorspace for editing, so I would think there would have to be some conversion.

And yet, I get useless color results from LR. It looks flat and redless....similar to viewing aRGB photos in the sRGB space.

Am I missing something obvious, or should I continue exporting to sRGB and printing from Picasa?

Thanks,
Greg
 
J

jjlphoto

Guest
The melissa thing you mention is the space that LR does its editing it, but it is not used for printing. Melissa is similar to ProPhotoRGB, but Melissa is a 2.2 gamma space, like sRGB and AdobeRGB. There were some glitches with Epson printers and LR, Andrew Rodney and others had a workaround. (this is not the current Snow Leopard workaround they are talking about).

The file data that goes out to the printer would be in the gamut of the paper/ink combo that you selected in the LR Print Job Panel. (This gets converted by LR behind the scenes.)

This tutorial shows how to configure your Print Job, pay special attention to the steps regarding to colormanagement. (make sure you also select "no color management" in the Epson driver as well.)
http://www.computer-darkroom.com/lr_13_print/lightroom_print.htm
 
Last edited:

Diane B

New member
John hit it on the head. There is very little reason (IMO) to use LR for printing if you don't use full color management. You need to use a profile for your media and select the correct media in your page setup (there are generic profiles for all Epson papers and most other media have profiles--or do your own or have one made for your particular printer).

LR 2.5 handles the sharpening similar to PKS (not surprising with Schewe being involved and prior to that Bruce Frasier before his untimely death). So, all in all, now my prints from LR 2.5 equal any of my prints from PS or Qimage.

Diane
 

gsking

New member
Thanks for the input. Diane, that color management is still required for printing from any other program, including Picasa. I'm using the same printer drivers.

It must be an issue with Epson, as the color management was SOOO far off, no set of combinations could fix it. Neither LR nor Epson can control the colors to anything even remotely usable. But if I print using sRGB from another program, I get decent results using either software color managment or printer color management. Yes, using the exact same paper profiles.

This is on PC, not Mac. Obviously, I have a unique problem that goes way beyond the experience here. I recommend people don't use an R800 printer with Lightroom...you'll either throw your printer out, or at least put your fist through it like I did. ;)

I don't recall the same issues with LR and my old Canon. Maybe I did, to a lesser degree. Perhaps that's why I gave up printing with it, too...LR's fault and not Canon's.

I'll give it a try with LR and my new Canon, but will probably just stick with printing from Picasa.

Greg
 

Diane B

New member
The drivers aren't the issue--you need to use paper profiles for both your printer and for your paper (that's color management I was referring to). It makes all the difference in the world. I am on a PC also--XP Pro. Down at the right bottom where it says color management, you drop down and choose a paper profile. You will have to do some searching and download profiles for the paper and the R800 from your paper mfg. Here is a link to Epson's ICC profiles for the R800 http://www.epson.com/cgi-bin/Store/...UseBVCookie=yes&noteoid=94205&type=highlights

You need to do the same for the Canon--install the profiles for the Canon printer you have or have them created--here's one quick link I found http://www.profilesbyrick.com/testimonials.htm?gclid=CLnV2seEk54CFRSdnAodkFhMog

Perhaps I'm not understanding your problem because you say you are using paper profiles but printing in sRGB--not possible with paper profiles--the color space has nothing to do with ICC profiles--you are taking it out of the hands of the printer entirely and relying on the paper profiles and Lightroom to handle the color. Its the same in PS---when you choose PHotoshop to manage the color you must choose an ICC paper profile--not a color space.

Perhaps we are talking about the same thing--but the mention of color spaces (Melissa) and sRGB have completely thrown me off.

Good luck with the new Canon. Printing from LR is just terrific--you have complete control over the process from color management to sizing, borders, printing algorithms--and you can create templates (presets) for prints that you repeat often (using same media, sizing, etc.)--and you never have to leave LR--that's the beauty of it. I printed from a collection yesterday--never had to leave LR for any part of the process.
 

gsking

New member
Let me rephrase.

I've used those same ICC profiles printing from Picasa (from JPG's) and gotten acceptable results, but with LR, the color control is SOOO far off, it looks very similar to trying to view an aRGB photo in sRGB space on the monitor.

So, given the similarity in the poorness of results, I had to assume it was a colorspace issue. It looks like LR is sending completely different data to the printer than it is sending to the screen. I'm not talking a little off here...I'm talking useless.

I can print the same file from LR and Picasa, using the same settings (either printer controlled or LR/Picasa controlled), using the same ICC's, and get useful results from Picasa, and crap from LR. I even used MonacoEZcolor to create a new ICC and "force" LR to see the garbage it's putting out, but it didn't work.

And funny you should mention it. Another reason why I hate LR's printing...it always defaults back to useless settings, like adding borders, etc. I have to re-fix them every time I want to print a photo, or if I change paper size or something. Example...I change from 5x7 to 8x10, and have to manually change like 8 sliders to remove the borders they "helpfully" added for me. No thanks.

Whereas, using a cheap program like Picasa, I can change things with two clicks and be done with it, and I don't have to fix it every time I go back to print.

I'll have to print some samples and scan them to prove it, but I'm sure it'll decide to work if I do. The old singing frog trick. ;)
 
J

jjlphoto

Guest
MonacoEZcolor is pretty useless. I suggest getting a control image to print out. Andrew Rodney (and other color management gurus) have ones posted on their sites. The control image should have flesh tones, grey scales, etc. Print it out unedited, make no color or level adjustments. Just use the proper profile for printer/paper ink combo. IE, select "Pro38 PLPP" and "Relative Colorimetric" in the color management tab in the tutorial I linked. (That stands for "Epson 3800 Premium Lustre Photo Paper".) Use the Printer settings as described in the tutorial, in your Canon driver there will be some sort of advanced mode that allows you to turn off printer color management. If you are not printing doing all of these steps as outlined, you are not printing using proper ICC/ICM color management practices.
 

gsking

New member
Okay, since y'all don't seem to believe me, here is the same file, printed using IDENTICAL SETTINGS, from LR (left) and Picasa (right). And trust me, I've tried EVERY ICC setting in LR, and none work. But, somehow, EVERY setting in Picasa can't produce colors as bad as LR.

So, you can see by the complete inability to match colors why I thought it was trying to print an aRGB photo in sRGB space.

Ignore the bleedthru from the back of the paper...I ran some test prints to ensure the heads were clean...another problem with the Epson.

 
Last edited:
J

jjlphoto

Guest
No offense, but you have been very sketchy about your colormanagement technique. Its definitely a workflow issue, but if you don't describe in proper detail what you are doing, no one can help. If 99.9% of LR users can produce outstanding results, that means the .1% who don't get outstanding results are not doing the proper procedure. You have free unfettered access to some of the best minds in the business here, so lets get down to serious business and stop ranting.

Let me rephrase.
I can print the same file from LR and Picasa, using the same settings (either printer controlled or LR/Picasa controlled), using the same ICC's, and get useful results from Picasa, and crap from LR. I even used MonacoEZcolor to create a new ICC and "force" LR to see the garbage it's putting out, but it didn't work.
When I read things like that, it offers no specifics, and even indicates you may not have as proficient of an understanding of colormanagement as you may think.

Describe your procedure for calibrating your monitor. What device and software, include details such as luminance value in cd/m2, white point in K, and gamma setting.

Please post screen shots of your LR colormanagement settings when you are in the print module. Let's take a look at the Print Job Panel.

Also, let's see some screen shots of your Canon printer driver settings with regard to its colormanagment settings.

Also, did you run a control image as suggested? This eliminates any variability and error that may be due to photographic technique.

Andrew Rodney's test image is here:
http://www.digitaldog.net/tips/index.shtml
Labeled "Printer Test File" on top left of page.
 
Last edited:

gsking

New member
No offense, but you DO realize that none of what you state matters, right?

You do realize that my monitor calibration has NO bearing on how my printer prints, right?

You do realize that my photographic technique has NO bearing on how my printer prints, right?

You do realize that, when the same settings produce different results from two different programs, that all of the remaining variables of which you speak have been factored out?

I could do screenprints of all the myriad permutations of LR settings, and their associated output, but it would take all day. And I'm sure it would be for naught.

What I do know is that, despite your aspersions that I have no concept of color management, I had no problems with it whatsoever prior to LR, and as best I can recall, prior to pairing it with this Epson printer. Ergo, any basic critical thinking would indicate that if there is actually a way to make LR do what it's supposed to do...they've made it unnecessarily difficult.

Perhaps there is a fourth or fifth screen of settings that needs to be adjusted? Perhaps "Managed by printer" doesn't REALLY mean the same thing on LR as "Managed by printer" on Picasa? After all, you'd expect that to eliminate all these variables, right?

Perhaps my expectations are too high. As an engineer, I suppose I have a different definition of "common sense". It's apparent that, if the LR people think the same way as you do, that they have made a bunch of non-appicable nonsense somehow apply to their color management workflow. Somehow, they have tapped into my monitor settings, the color temperature of my room lighting, and even the temperature of my wine fridge. All of these somehow factor into how my printer prints???

Sorry for the sarcasm. I do appreciate the effort, but apparently there isn't a simple answer, which again means only one of two things can be concluded:

1. LR does not talk well with my printers, for an unknown reason.
2. LR is unnecessarily complicated in its printers settings.

I mention again that NOTHING I can do in Picasa can make the photos look as bad they do from LR. And EVERY setting in LR cannot make the photos look even close to usable.

Given that last fact, Option #1 seems much more likely than Option #2.
 
J

jjlphoto

Guest
You do realize that my monitor calibration has NO bearing on how my printer prints, right?
Incorrect. An improperly calibrated monitor may induce you to falsely adjust an otherwise prefect file. Only Dan Margulis can make a perfect color print from a washed out monitor, probably even from a monochrome display. :p


You do realize that my photographic technique has NO bearing on how my printer prints, right?
GIGO


You do realize that, when the same settings produce different results from two different programs, that all of the remaining variables of which you speak have been factored out?
Again, what are these settings you keep mentioning? There are settings and there are SETTINGS.


I could do screenprints of all the myriad permutations of LR settings, and their associated output, but it would take all day. And I'm sure it would be for naught.
You could probably do it in four screen shots. This task, including posting is less than a ten minute ordeal.


What I do know is that, despite your aspersions that I have no concept of color management, I had no problems with it whatsoever prior to LR, and as best I can recall, prior to pairing it with this Epson printer. Ergo, any basic critical thinking would indicate that if there is actually a way to make LR do what it's supposed to do...they've made it unnecessarily difficult.
I consult with many people who actually have gotten lucky doing "default" types of printing. But when asked to reproduce something specific, make a print with a high degree of color accuracy, or to move into a truly colormanaged environment, it's the old deer in the headlights thing. The Colormanagement workflow, ICC/ICM workflow is ten years old. It's pretty much as smooth as its going to get by now.


Perhaps there is a fourth or fifth screen of settings that needs to be adjusted? Perhaps "Managed by printer" doesn't REALLY mean the same thing on LR as "Managed by printer" on Picasa? After all, you'd expect that to eliminate all these variables, right?
A workflow that uses any sort of "Managed by Printer" is not a properly colormanaged workflow. Sorry. Too many variables.


Perhaps my expectations are too high. As an engineer, I suppose I have a different definition of "common sense". It's apparent that, if the LR people think the same way as you do, that they have made a bunch of non-appicable nonsense somehow apply to their color management workflow. Somehow, they have tapped into my monitor settings, the color temperature of my room lighting, and even the temperature of my wine fridge. All of these somehow factor into how my printer prints???
No need to be condescending. But since you opened that can of worms, here is a brief snippet of my curriculum vitae: :lecture:
Bachelors Degree 1983 from Brooks Institute. Began doing color work with the actual dye transfer process there. Studied amongst other, Industrial and Scientific photography with Vernon Miller. I took weekend labs in holography with UCLA guys. Studied light emmissions with a spectrometer I made myself. Brooks also had affiliations with Jet Propulsion Labs, NASA, TRW, amongst others.

I worked extensively with conventional transparency and negative film stocks, processing in E6, C41, Cibachrome, and a myriad of other printing including with a Kreonite (pre RA-4 process). I first began doing digital imaging and digital printing in 1993 with the Kodak DCS200 and a Kodak Dye Sub printer. I studied photomultiplier tube drum scanning, CCD scanning, worked with RIPs and film output, DuPont Chromalin proofing, 3M MatchPrint digital proofing, and Kodak Approval digital proofing. Took seminars from colormanagement guys like Michael Brown of Kodak in 2000. Began following industry leaders like Andrew Rodney, Jeff Schewe, the late Bruce Fraser, John Paul Caponigro, Bruce Lindbloom, Don Hutcheson, Robin Myers, Don Atkinson, and a whole of other too numerous domestic and abroad to mention. Heck, I've even met Thomas Knoll. (whoops, forget to mention Jack and Guy. I've been networking with these guys for several years now. Best in the biz IMO.)

I take colormanagement very seriously. It is my lifeblood. Here's one of my favorite quotes:
Amateurs practice to try to get it right. Professionals practice so they can't get it wrong.


Sorry for the sarcasm. I do appreciate the effort, but apparently there isn't a simple answer, which again means only one of two things can be concluded:

1. LR does not talk well with my printers, for an unknown reason.
2. LR is unnecessarily complicated in its printers settings.
When colormanagement first hit the scenes, it seemed to be made for engineers. Clunky interfaces, unfamiliar language, hidden menus, convoluted processes and procedures, but us mere photographers did figure it out, and we stuck with it working hard with hardware and software people until it flowed much easier. :toocool:
 
Last edited:

Dale Allyn

New member
The image printed via LR *looks like* it's being double color managed. i.e. both LR and printer driver are influencing colors.
 
J

jjlphoto

Guest
The image printed via LR *looks like* it's being double color managed. i.e. both LR and printer driver are influencing colors.
Double color managed is a very common problem. That's where the screen shots of the Canon printer settings would be useful.
 

Dale Allyn

New member
Double color managed is a very common problem. That's where the screen shots of the Canon printer settings would be useful.
;) That was kind of my way of agreeing, without stirring anything up. :)

Double color managing is perhaps the most common problem in this kind of situation. Hopefully Greg will be able to resolve this or will post the needed screen shots to help locate the problem.
 

gsking

New member
Exactly...double color managed. But, there seems to be no way to UNDO it, which is why I support my accusation of LR making it way too difficult. What more should I need to do than say "MANAGED BY PRINTER"??? That should turn off ALL LR COLOR MANAGEMENT, right???? I'm just a Luddite, I suppose.

And yes, I've tried it the other way, EVERY OTHER WAY, and it comes out the same or TOO red, meaning it's double-color-managed the other direction.

John, I appreciate your experience, but you're only supporting my theory. If they've made it so convoluted that only people like you can understand it, then they've made it too difficult. I can't apparently figure out how to turn off LR color managment, or turn off printer color management, because I have to turn it off in FOUR places?

No, I don't want the printer doing it for me, but I figure I'd start with the most basic settings before going back to ICC profiles. If it can't get THAT right, what's the point? BTW, the different ICC profiles make much less difference than seen in this photo.

How many variables are there in a "managed by printer" workflow exactly? Why isn't the data coming out of LR EXACTLY the same as the data coming out of Picasa? Right or wrong, both look EXACTLY the same on my screen, and the image out of Picasa looks VERY close to the monitor. That takes my monitor calibration and my photo skill out of the equation, but thanks for assuming they matter.

It's like you're a NASCAR driver, and you're claiming it's my fault that the car won't start. Yes, it's my fault if I can't drive it as fast as you can around the track, but if your race car takes more than a turned key to start, it's too difficult, and I won't take any blame for it. My other car starts and drives just fine, even if it won't hit 140mph and corner at 1g.

Your blaming my monitor and my photo skills just highlights your inability to see the true issue here.

The fact that I followed Monaco's directions to the letter, and STILL got crap reinforces my contention that either LR is screwed up, or they've made it too difficult to comprehend.

Tell you what. I'll entertain you and repeat that test using ICC's for Espon with both programs. I will turn OFF "managed by printer", and even take a screen print of both screens to prove it. And when it continues to look like crap, I'll await direction from you on how to fix it. And an apology for insulting my camera and my monitor. :)

Or better yet...how about your post a "perfect" photo? I'll download it and print it with both methods. Then you can't blame my equipment or talent.
 
J

jjlphoto

Guest
Why isn't the data coming out of LR EXACTLY the same as the data coming out of Picasa?
Because it's not.


I can't apparently figure out how to turn off LR color managment, or turn off printer color management, because I have to turn it off in FOUR places?
When you are in the LR Print Job Panel, and select a printer/paper ICC profile in the Colormanagement tab, LR switches away from the "Managed by Printer" mode.


Right or wrong, both look EXACTLY the same on my screen, and the image out of Picasa looks VERY close to the monitor. That takes my monitor calibration and my photo skill out of the equation, but thanks for assuming they matter.
A monitor profile takes the data from a colormanaged application like LR, and renders the image properly on screen. Makes no difference if the source image exists in sRGB, AdobeRGB, ColorMatcgRGB, ProPhotRGB, etc. A colormanaged application like LR will render that image properly on screen if there is a quality display profile for LR to grab. Not sure what browser you are using. Not all are colormanaged, so what you are viewing while in Picassa may not be an accurate representation of the photo. If your monitor profile is bad, or if LR is not grabbing that profile properly, you may be hosing (or not perfecting) an otherwise perfect (or imperfect) file.

Regarding calibration, all parts matter. You can't pick and choose what parts of the chain you want to implement and hope it will work.


Your blaming my monitor and my photo skills just highlights your inability to see the true issue here.
No one is blaming anything. Your goal is not to make an LR print match a Picasa print. You goal is to get a proper print out of LR. So we look at all your steps of the chain and try to eliminate as many variables as possible. Hence the control image.


The fact that I followed Monaco's directions to the letter, and STILL got crap reinforces my contention that either LR is screwed up, or they've made it too difficult to comprehend.
What are you doing with the Monoca product. Please describe. Is this that one where you scan their target and it makes a display profile? It would be nice to know specifics rather than nebulous terms like "crap" and "screwed up". Imagine you are trying to troubleshoot a product you engineered. "Crap" and "Screwed up" won't help you know what is wrong.


Tell you what. I'll entertain you and repeat that test using ICC's for Espon with both programs.
You're not entertaining anyone. You came here from another discipline with hat in hand asking for suggestions.


Or better yet...how about your post a "perfect" photo? I'll download it and print it with both methods. Then you can't blame my equipment or talent.
You were given a link to a perfectly acceptable test file.
 
Last edited:

gsking

New member
Aha, so I'm right then. LR isn't sending the same image data (from the SAME FILE) to the printer as Picasa, even though I tell it to let the printer manage the color. Please explain to me (slowly if necessary) why this makes any sense. Why can't LR stop managing the color if I tell it to stop managing the color?

And what paper/ink combination would require such a significant red shift in the first place???

PS...Picasa isn't a "browser". I can print right out of Windows too and get the same decent results.

Either way, we're back to my original concern. You're implying that LR is doing some color manipulation to the photo it displays on the screen that Picasa doesn't do.

Except when I look at the SAME JPG file on both programs, they look identical on screen, but don't print the same at all. Makes perfect sense...maybe to you. It makes no sense to me. LR is still displaying a proper photo on-screen, and sending crap to the printer. Since the JPG file prints fine from Picasa, or from Costco, and looks fine on the monitor in BOTH programs, the monitor profile cannot be the problem.

I'm not picking and choosing which portions of the color management to exclude, I'm doing a proper scientific fault analysis to eliminate non-contributory factors, to simplify the forensic process. Why you insist on continuing to insist they matter is beyond me.

No, actually my goal IS to make the LR print look like the Picasa print. I'm not even being that picky. I realize the extra color management steps you claim are mandatory are required for a "proper LR print", given different paper and ink combinations. But I'll settle for something acceptable. First things first.

I showed you in unnebulous terms what "crap" meant. I'll do so again with your test file, if you insist.
 
J

jjlphoto

Guest
Again, what exactly is the Monoco product doing? Is it creating a display profile? Is your computer's OS and LR using that display profile? Do you know the place to see what display profile LR is currently using? (Being a Mac user, I can't guide you to look to see what display profile your OS is using. Gotta do that one on your own.)

The reason I keep harping on this is that we don't know which is the "correct" image. I just don't know how Picassa displays colors. Example: Canon DPP RAW processing software does not automatically grab one's current display profile. The user has to manually go into a tab and intentionally select it, otherwise what one sees in the Canon DPP window is 'false'.

A proper display profile is crucial because it is the first step. If you are relying on a some sort of "factory default" display profile, what you may be seeing on screen could be "crap" although the file itself may be perfectly acceptable.

Also, I am not implying that LR is doing some color manipulation to the photo it displays on the screen. What LR does, is that it takes your display profile and applies it behind the scenes to the file so you can view the image properly. This display profile does not follow the file to the printer. Think of it this way: It is sort of a temporary veil that is virtually laid over the file only when viewing the image in the LR window.
 
Last edited:
J

jjlphoto

Guest
Attached two samples of Epson driver showing disabled colormanagement in it. Regarding your print, the only colormanagement that is now occurring is the printer/paper profile that you selected in the colormanagement toggle in the LR Print Job panel.
 
Last edited:

gsking

New member
John,

I $hitcanned Monaco after giving it a quick try to fix this very problem. It made things worse, but probably due to no fault of its own. This problem is independent of that, and existed before, so maybe I shouldn't fault Monoco. It may very well be useful in finessing ICC profiles...if I can get them to work in the first place. ;)

But I asked here earlier about that program, and it got bad reviews, so I felt vindicated. :)

The "correct" image is what I see everywhere else EXCEPT in LR/CS's printed output. I see it in the camera, in every program I view the image with (including LR and CS), and in every printout from every other program. The obvious flaw is the red output, as shown in my above example. The test outputs using the Monaco color checker and even your example (I've used that one before IIRC)...all show the same flaws.


Aha, you're using Mac. No wonder we can't get along. ;) All my screens are totally different, and utterly more complex...but yes, I have those settings turned off correctly as far as I can tell.

Perhaps I'll try CS4 again instead of LR to see if I can replicate the problem, and/or get an acceptable result. The controls might be a bit more obvious. Or, I'll try to double-or-zero-manage the colors in Picasa (if it's even possible) to see if I can replicate the problem.
 
Top