Hello, I would appreciate any thoughts, suggestions, or explanations you might be able to give regarding something I recently encountered when printing from Photoshop.
I thought I knew what I was doing but now I’m not so sure. All along I’ve been able to make high quality prints but with some considerable trial and error. I was following what I thought was appropriate protocol using Photoshop. [I use high quality cameras/lenses, do my image editing on a 5K iMac and print using an Epson 7900 printer and I’m generally satisfied with my icc profiles.]
My Method
I use the Adobe RGB setting in my cameras and shoot raw of course. Then, in the raw conversion process I open a file using the ProPhoto RGB color space in Photoshop, where I do my editing. I employ Photoshop’s soft proofing feature, using the appropriate paper color profile (and specifying perceptual rendering intent). When it comes time to make a print I let Photoshop do the color management, specifying the paper profile, and perceptual rendering.
Usually the first print comes out flat/low contrast and desaturated relative to what I see in the soft proof, but through trial and error I add fudge-factor layers to get the look I want from the final print. While tedious at times I was resigned; I thought this was the way to do it.
Their Method
Recently my college teacher daughter explained that in her photography class (that uses a more consumer grade Epson 800 printer), she and a tech guy co-teacher weren’t happy with this “traditional” (Photoshop) protocol and have resorted to a work-around:
After opening a file in Photoshop they convert the image profile to the desired paper profile, using relative rendering intent, and then they use the printer’s (Epson’s) color controls through the Photoshop dialog box, again specifying relative rendering intent. In their eyes the results looked more accurate and neutral.
This didn’t make sense to me so I began experimenting, and darned if a few of my test prints didn’t look MUCH better using their method, and they were a better match to the soft proof screen!
So I tried this approach using a GretagMacbeth Color Checker as a test image, as well as another common color reference image. The results are consistent with my first impressions, the work-around gives better looking results!
Any Thoughts?
Has anyone else experienced this? Do you have any ideas why this is happening?
I’m most troubled by the idea of it, I’m happy to use this approach in my work, but what should a college level photography professor advise her students?
Thank you.
Peter
I thought I knew what I was doing but now I’m not so sure. All along I’ve been able to make high quality prints but with some considerable trial and error. I was following what I thought was appropriate protocol using Photoshop. [I use high quality cameras/lenses, do my image editing on a 5K iMac and print using an Epson 7900 printer and I’m generally satisfied with my icc profiles.]
My Method
I use the Adobe RGB setting in my cameras and shoot raw of course. Then, in the raw conversion process I open a file using the ProPhoto RGB color space in Photoshop, where I do my editing. I employ Photoshop’s soft proofing feature, using the appropriate paper color profile (and specifying perceptual rendering intent). When it comes time to make a print I let Photoshop do the color management, specifying the paper profile, and perceptual rendering.
Usually the first print comes out flat/low contrast and desaturated relative to what I see in the soft proof, but through trial and error I add fudge-factor layers to get the look I want from the final print. While tedious at times I was resigned; I thought this was the way to do it.
Their Method
Recently my college teacher daughter explained that in her photography class (that uses a more consumer grade Epson 800 printer), she and a tech guy co-teacher weren’t happy with this “traditional” (Photoshop) protocol and have resorted to a work-around:
After opening a file in Photoshop they convert the image profile to the desired paper profile, using relative rendering intent, and then they use the printer’s (Epson’s) color controls through the Photoshop dialog box, again specifying relative rendering intent. In their eyes the results looked more accurate and neutral.
This didn’t make sense to me so I began experimenting, and darned if a few of my test prints didn’t look MUCH better using their method, and they were a better match to the soft proof screen!
So I tried this approach using a GretagMacbeth Color Checker as a test image, as well as another common color reference image. The results are consistent with my first impressions, the work-around gives better looking results!
Any Thoughts?
Has anyone else experienced this? Do you have any ideas why this is happening?
I’m most troubled by the idea of it, I’m happy to use this approach in my work, but what should a college level photography professor advise her students?
Thank you.
Peter