As soon as photography hit the digital age, the expectations we have with regards to our prints has increased more than ever before. In the days of film, our expectations were tempered by the lack of a tangible basis to compare our prints to. We couldn't look at a negative and compare it to a print as the colors were opposing and the negatives were usually too small to look compare with. For many photographers, we judge our prints as against our memories of the subject we photographed. In many cases, most people would accept the prints they received from the lab as long as the colors were acceptable.

Once we started going digital (via scanning and digital cameras) we could see our captured images on monitors. We see the colors and tones they possess. We are even endowed with a new capability, to totally control how the colors should come out. This increased our expectation a hundred fold. We then expect the same colors and tones to come out when we have the image printed. Unfortunately, as many color-concerned photographers have encountered, what they see isn't often what they get.

There is a solution to the problem though. The science of color management! One can actually control his workflow so that he can achieve accurate colors from capture, to monitor, to print. This forum brings to the fore this technology that has recently began to be introduced into the Philippine photography scene.

Louie,

Excellent introduction and I cannot agree more. There is not enough information about color management in the Philippines. I'm only now beginning to understand color theory and management but have just touched the tip of the iceberg. I have loads of questions to ask and might be hanging around here more than the other categories. Hope you can make the learning curve shorter for all of us. Glad to have you on board!

Nick

I would like to ask how do we use those printer profiles for? Is it for soft proofing only? I think Noritsu machines doesn't accept those profiles.

I would like to ask how do we use those printer profiles for? Is it for soft proofing only? I think Noritsu machines doesn't accept those profiles.

There are basically two ways of using the printer profiles. One is for soft proofing, and another is through converting a file into the printer profile prior to printing.

Which method to use it for depends on what printer you will be using.

Ideally, if the photo lab is color managed (strictly using Color Management technology protocols) then you would only need to use the profiles to softproof. A color managed lab would be using custom made profiles and convert your image files into their profile prior to printing.

Now, if you were using your own desktop printer, then you would be converting your image to your printer profile prior to printing so that the printer could accurately render the colors of your source image.

Now, the Noritsu is a unique system. It is a closed system. Meaning, one cannot integrate a printer profile into the system. But there are ways to work around it. One is to convert your images to the noritsu printer profile yourself before sending it to be printed. This allows you to have print outs with accurate colors. Or you can just use the printer profile for softproofing. This works almost as well. Even though Noritsu's are a closed system, it has its own unique internal color matching mechanism that can give relatively accurate colors. But if you are after really strict color matching, then it would be best to convert to the profile.

One thing though you must bear in mind is that printer profiles are both paper and printer specific. In other words, there is no such thing as a Noritsu Profile - it has to be a Noritsu plus Paper profile. The colors of the Noritsu's output is largely conditioned by the paper it is using. Also, even same models of Noritsu printers do not render colors exactly the same. Thus each machine should have its own custom made profile if you are after the highest level of accuracy.

If you want to find out more information, check out the color management section of http://dpiphotocenter.com - there are instructions on how to use the profiles. And basics on how to get an image to print color match.

Hi Louie,

I'd like to know how important the monitor is in all of this. If what I see on my monitor is not the same as what DPI sees on their monitor, then I assume there is no chance for me to get the prints I want no matter how much I use the profiles. Am I correct in saying this?

For example, assume that I have a new photo of a landscape for a contest. I edit it in my computer to the way I like. I have the sky a nice blue. However, when I get the results from the lab, the sky now has a magenta cast. Assume the lab I went to was DPI which is a fully calibrated facility. What DPI sees on its monitors it gets on its prints. The icc profiles it uses are to characterize its own printers and paper. So what good is this profile to me? I can use it in soft proof in Photoshop but would it matter if DPI and I do not see the same thing?

Hi Louie,

I'd like to know how important the monitor is in all of this. If what I see on my monitor is not the same as what DPI sees on their monitor, then I assume there is no chance for me to get the prints I want no matter how much I use the profiles. Am I correct in saying this?

For example, assume that I have a new photo of a landscape for a contest. I edit it in my computer to the way I like. I have the sky a nice blue. However, when I get the results from the lab, the sky now has a magenta cast. Assume the lab I went to was DPI which is a fully calibrated facility. What DPI sees on its monitors it gets on its prints. The icc profiles it uses are to characterize its own printers and paper. So what good is this profile to me? I can use it in soft proof in Photoshop but would it matter if DPI and I do not see the same thing?


The monitor plays a major part in it. You are right, if the monitors differ then the process becomes quite ineffective. To solve the problem, the monitor should be calibrated and profiled.

In the past, monitor calibration meant adjusting the colors and tones of our monitor to match the output of a particular printer. The problem with that is that if you used a different printer at some point, it wouldn't match. In recent years, the color scientists have advanced technology such that calibration and profiling sets a monitor to a specific set of standards - the basis is human vision. So instead of your monitor's colors being adjusted to match some printer, it is now set to how human vision perceives colors.

Now with that situation, anyone who calibrates and profiles his monitor properly should be able to view an image and see its colors the way it was meant to be viewed. Also, if that image is viewed on someone else's calibrated and profiled monitor, then the colors would be relatively consistent.

I say relatively consistent because there is another factor here that comes into play - the white point or the color temperature we set our monitors to. Human vision sees color in a particular way, but the ambient light also affects the way we see color. The colors we see during the midday sun differs from the colors we see under a late afternoon sun. So, for consistency, it is ideal that all monitors are set to a common white point. The ideal is daylight. There are two options - 5000 degrees kelvin, which is the standard for presses, and 6500 degrees kelvin which is recommended by color management experts. So if your monitor is calibrated within these ranges, then the colors shouldn't be far off from another calibrated monitor.

Okay, so let me ask you this: I work off a iMac G5. I calibrated this monitor to Gamma 2.2 and 6500K but my screen to print match was at best fair when outputting to my Epson inkjet. However, after experimenting, I decided to calibrate to Native Gamma and Native White Point. After doing so, the match was very good.

Since I do my own printing, I work in a closed-loop environment and get a good screen to print match. But will a file edited on my monitor give me a good color match at DPI? I am not calibrated to the standard 5000K or 6500K. And why two standards in the first place? 5000K looks very yellow and I bet that if I edited under that environment, my prints would probably have a cool cast to them since I'd be trying to counter the warmth produced by the monitor.

So what should I calibrate to?

Okay, so let me ask you this: I work off a iMac G5. I calibrated this monitor to Gamma 2.2 and 6500K but my screen to print match was at best fair when outputting to my Epson inkjet. However, after experimenting, I decided to calibrate to Native Gamma and Native White Point. After doing so, the match was very good.

Since I do my own printing, I work in a closed-loop environment and get a good screen to print match. But will a file edited on my monitor give me a good color match at DPI? I am not calibrated to the standard 5000K or 6500K. And why two standards in the first place? 5000K looks very yellow and I bet that if I edited under that environment, my prints would probably have a cool cast to them since I'd be trying to counter the warmth produced by the monitor.

So what should I calibrate to?


First let me ask what tool and application are you using to calibrate your monitor?

Now, if we are working for a color match between monitor and print we have to consider the ambient light we will be viewing the images under. In color managed prepresses their monitors would be calibrated to 5000k and they would have critically controlled viewing booth wherein they have a 5000k light also. They are able to achieve a very high match because the color temperature of their viewing light and their monitor are the same.

In my previous post, I mentioned that many color management experts recommend calibrating to 6500k instead of 5000k precisely because of what you observed, 5000k has a general yellowish tone to it. Now if we have our monitor set to 6500k, we will be able to get a good print match if our viewing light is also 6500k. If not then we would not get a good match.

The seemingly simple solution would be to get a viewing light that is rated at 6500k. Unfortunately, it isn't that simple because there is no perfect 6500k lights. Sorry if this gets a bit technical, but white light is actually made from an even combination of 7 different light frequenciens - red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, violet. The colors of the rainbow. In other words, pure white light has equal amounts of all these wavelengths of light. Unfortunately, since we can't have actual sunlight as a constant viewing light, we have to resort to artificial light sources. The problem is that artificial light sources have limitations.

Fluorescent lights, for example, appear to give white light. If you search for fluorescent bulbs, you could actually find some with a color temperature rated at 6500k. It would seem to solve the problem. Unfortunately, it is not like sunlight where in all wavelengths are equal. In a fluorescent light, though it averages a color temperature of 6500k, there is an imbalance in the levels of the different wavelenghts. The green component is much more dominant. That's why when we shoot with film under fluorescent light, it appears green.

Lights actually have another rating called CRI which stands for Color Rendering Index. The higher the CRI value is, the closer the light is to sunlight in terms of the different wavelenghts (colors) of light being even. Only sunlight is rated at a CRI of 100. Most flourescent bulbs have a CRI of around 60-70 - simply because the different wavenlengths are uneven.

So, if I get a 6500k fluorescent bulb as my viewing light and I calibrate my monitor to 6500k I would still notice a differenc in the colors. For example, if I view a print as against the image on a monitor, the skin tone would appear a little more reddish on the monitor as agains to a little more greenish on the print.

There are two solutions to this problem. First is to find a really good viewing light with the correct color temperature and a very high CRI. Unfortunately, they are hard to find and are quite expensive. Plus most of the high CRi viewing lights available are in the 5000k color temperature. You'd have to order abroad for good 6500k lights.

Now there is another solution, which is to calibrate your monitor to the actual color temperature of your viewing light. Some calibration devices, such as the Monaco Optix XR Pro allows you to measure the actual color values of your viewing light and set your monitor's white point to it. I have actually tried this and it works very very well. Even those that use adobe gamma for calibrating will notice that there is an option to adjust the whtie point to the ambient light.

You mentioned that the native white point of your monitor produced a better match than when set to 6500k. That's probably because the color temperature of your viewing light is closer to the native white point of your monitor.

Louie,

I use Gretag Eye One Photo - with Match 3.6 as the software. I have a GTI viewing booth set to 6500K. The booth is new but since my Mac had a defective part and is being serviced, I haven't had the chance to calibrate it to 6500k to see if I get a good screen to print match.

I would like to know what is your opinion as to the best monitor settings if you plan to have a digital lab print for you. Getting the lab's ICCs are useless unless your monitor is displaying colors correctly. But since there are so many standards around, what in your opinion should we follow?

From one school of thought, there is no definitve standard since the place where the print will be viewed isn't always constant. We might set a standard at 6500k and have a perfect viewing booth also at 6500k, get excellent color match, but then later the prints are viewed under varied lighting conditions.
So, there are some who have really advanced viewing booths wherein they have settings for different color temperatures and can compare how their print will look under 5000k, 6500k, flourescent, tungsten, etc.
For most purposes 6500k would be fine. The GTI viewing booth should work pretty well. The bulbs should have a pretty high CRI rating, although it being basically a flourescent bulb, there would still be a slight imbalance of some of the wavelengths. Still you should get relatively close match.
Now if you want to have a really good match from monitor to print, the best solution I have found was to set the monitor's white point during calibration to the ambient light. I believe your device can measure ambient light off a white card. Best way to do it, would be to use a Gretag Macbeth white card and measure the light of your viewing booth off the card with your calibration device and then set the white point to it. I have found that we can achieve the closest match this way. You might not get an exact color temperature value but a more precise value in terms of x and y coordinates.
Otherwise, if you have a 6500k viewing booth, then set your monitor to 6500k and you should get a relatively close match.

Now you might be wondering what if let's say your monitor is set at 6500k and you have a good match with your viewing light, and let's say the lab has its monitor set at 5000k - would that affect the color of your prints? The answer is no. If both monitors are accurately calibrated and profiled, they are set to display colors as how they are perceived by human vision. That is the standard. The variation would be the color temperature. So that means if it is set at 5000k, that's how human vision would see those colors if it was under 5000k lights. If your monitor is set at 6500k, your image will appear as how human vision would see it at 6500k. The monitors change, but the image remains the same. There is no change in the file itself.
So, if you have your system setup wherein your monitor is accurately calibrated, you have a viewing light that matches the white point of your monitor, plus you have the profiles of the printer installed for softproofing, you actually don't need to worry if the files appear differently on your lab's monitor. The monitor is only for viewing and would not affect the file itself. (Unless you ask the lab to adjust the colors for you). The file would then be converted to the profile prior to printing ( the same profile that you softproofed on your monitor) - the resulting print should then match your image when you view them in your color managed system.

Your comments are good Louie and things are starting to make more sense now.

This is the side of digital photography that most people will not understand. With an expert like you here, we hope the learning curve becomes shorter for all of us.

Thank you for your comments.

Hi Louie, Nick

Interesting opening discussion. Allow me to share my 2 centimos.

Let me start by asking: Would Toscanini or Stokowski play the same musical score in exactly the same way?

The answer will differ depending how initiatied your ears are and how well you know the score. IMV, the same applies to photography.

At the photographer's level, color management brings a certain level of control and consistency to the digital process. At least YOU KNOW that your equipment are showing you images WRT a KNOWN color/tone standard. This enables you to:

1) know the printer's machine bias wrt to tones/colors;

2) estimate the level of adjustments needed for the print;

3) decide if such adjustments are necessary.

In the analog days, fine art photographers preferred to either make their own prints or work exhaustively with a printer to exercise the needed control to create prints they are SATISFIED with. A lot of time/materials are wasted in the process. IMO, the same applies in the digital process today.

In practical terms, my experience suggests its best to convert the color space to srgb if sending the files to most labs in the Philippines. Most machines are calibrated to work in this color space as this is commonly used. The things to watch for are consistency of tones and believability of colors. You may be suprised by the capabilities of these machines.
Soft proofing using a lab's profile allows you to see their machine,s bias and adjust files accordingly. However, it is no guarantee you will get exactly the same colors/tones as shown on your monitor. At the end of the day, nothing beats the actual print to work with. But you already know that. :)

I hope this muddling helps clarify the discussion. ;)

Louie,

Excellent introduction and I cannot agree more. There is not enough information about color management in the Philippines. I'm only now beginning to understand color theory and management but have just touched the tip of the iceberg. I have loads of questions to ask and might be hanging around here more than the other categories. Hope you can make the learning curve shorter for all of us. Glad to have you on board!

Nick

amen to that

whew! this is very hard reading... but i'll reread and reread until i begin to get it... :)

Martin,

Color Management and Theory can be really deep. I am starting to get the hang of it but not in the same league as Louie. He is one of the better ones in the country. And I bet there are even other more intense color "geeks" out there (just joking Louie! ) The stuff is addicting though. Pilar thought I flipped my lid when I instructed our contractor to paint the walls of our new office to a medium gray. I don't want any color to throw off the colors on my monitor!

I suggest to start a new thread and ask whatever question you want. There is much to learn.

wow... very informative sir.

Hi louie, i had this problem a few weeks ago, a friend wanted an enlarged print of a photo i did for her.
I just gave her a file of the photo on a cd and a sample print of my photo which i did on my printer which is calibrated to my computer as reference.

When she went out to one of the digital printers for printing, the colors came out all wrong and the printer said we should save our file in CMYK?

Was it valid? would it help if we saved it in CMYK? Didnt my sample print help at all in helping him get the right color? Whats the protocol in printing to a third party printer?

thanks and congratulations for a having a fine forum such as this..

Hi louie, i had this problem a few weeks ago, a friend wanted an enlarged print of a photo i did for her.
I just gave her a file of the photo on a cd and a sample print of my photo which i did on my printer which is calibrated to my computer as reference.

When she went out to one of the digital printers for printing, the colors came out all wrong and the printer said we should save our file in CMYK?

Was it valid? would it help if we saved it in CMYK? Didnt my sample print help at all in helping him get the right color? Whats the protocol in printing to a third party printer?

thanks and congratulations for a having a fine forum such as this..

Would you know what digital printer? I guess it wasn't a photolab as they would have required an RGB file.
How off were the colors? Were all the colors consistently off or were some colors off while some were ok?
There are different possibilities, we'd need more information to sort out the problem.

thanks for replying sir louie..

it was a large format HP..im not sure of the model..It was one of those printing shops that also print on tarpaulin, signs etc..the output had a green tint..

I was also surprised because i experienced printing with other shops like those before but i had no problem giving them an RGB file and a sample print from me..

They ended up not printing it because he could not get the right colors, so im thinking he might not know how to operate correctly such expensive equipment..

thanks for replying sir louie..

it was a large format HP..im not sure of the model..It was one of those printing shops that also print on tarpaulin, signs etc..the output had a green tint..

I was also surprised because i experienced printing with other shops like those before but i had no problem giving them an RGB file and a sample print from me..

They ended up not printing it because he could not get the right colors, so im thinking he might not know how to operate correctly such expensive equipment..

Ok, green tints are quite common in some of these large format prints done locally. I suspect you are right, they probably don't know how to utilize the equipment properly. For colors to come out accurate, they have to have some sense of color management. Which means they should have profiles for their printers with specific papers and inks. Unfortunately, many such local printing bureaus have no awareness of color management. Some do use default printer profiles that come with the printers but when they start using different papers or alternative inks, these profiles become ineffective.

thanks sir louie,

Thats bad for the printing industry locally and bad for us customers when we cant rely on some of these shops for our needs..
So sir what should i be aware of when i want my printing done by a local shop? is it enough to give a cd and a small sample print of the pic and find a reliable printer?

or is there are some more info i should know to help the printer print my photos properly?
Your advice will be greatly appreciated..thanks

I was trying to make a new thread with Mario's post but for some reason couldn't do it.

Anyway, Louie is correct that unless you are printing to a press you should hand over files that are in RGB and not CMYK. Your printer may be using a RIP that will allow CMYK input data, but there is no reason for you to send it over in CMYK because they should handle the separations themselves.

Do you think that your printer could be assigning a profile to your file and thus influencing a color shift? I say, give your printer a LAB file. LAB is a universal space and unless you are trying to print some really super saturated colors then your printer should not have any problems. Now, if your printer has no idea about LAB and what to do with it, I say you should find another printer.

noted sir nick,
i was ready to find another printer na talaga..

thanks for the very informative inputs..
Anyway should have started nga a new thread with my inquiries, you're right color management is really a broad and deep topic..

thanks for accomodating me and more power to this website :)

thanks sir louie,

Thats bad for the printing industry locally and bad for us customers when we cant rely on some of these shops for our needs..
So sir what should i be aware of when i want my printing done by a local shop? is it enough to give a cd and a small sample print of the pic and find a reliable printer?

or is there are some more info i should know to help the printer print my photos properly?
Your advice will be greatly appreciated..thanks

3 things you can do to solve your problem

1. Try to see if the printing outfit can provide ICC profiles for their printer/paper. If they do, then they at least are aware of color management. Once you have the profiles, you can use it to softproof the images on your computer, thus you can fine tune your image based on how the printer will render the colors.

2. You can actually have profiles made for your regular printer. You can find a vendor who does create printer profiles. They will provide with you a file that needs to be printed. You have your printer print the file and send the print out to the profiing vendor. They will make a profile for you. A bit costly though, but you can actually find vendors in the US via the web who can do it for less than a $100.

3. You can take the route a lot of ad agencies and clients take when dealing with large format printers. The printers show you a small sample print out of how the colors will appear and you sign the sample once you are pleased with the color. Then they will print your large format print and it should be consistent with the colors of the sample you signed.

thanks sir louie, will try your suggestions, thank you very much...:)

Lights actually have another rating called CRI which stands for Color Rendering Index. The higher the CRI value is, the closer the light is to sunlight in terms of the different wavelenghts (colors) of light being even. Only sunlight is rated at a CRI of 100. Most flourescent bulbs have a CRI of around 60-70 - simply because the different wavenlengths are uneven.


Hi Louie & Nick,

A few years back, we were trying to set up the lighting (as in spotlight) in a church with a Lighting Engineer friend of mine, and he also educated me about the CRI thingy. At that time, he was recommending lamps manufactured by Philips for professional applications called 'Master Colour Line". These were MR 16 Halogens as well as compact flourescents and CDMT (Metal halide) which had CRI's in excess of 84. We sourced them locally from a Philips Professional Lighting distributor. Am sure a quick call would confirm if these bulbs are still available. They were more expensive than regular flourescent tubes, but only by 30% siguro. This would be the scientific way.

Or you can do it like some motion picture editors and colorists do it: Standard daylight flourescent plus 60w incandescent bulb = pinoy-style near-daylight color balance.

It would actually be nice to get the POV of a long time Avid Editor, Cinematographer or Colorist to share their thoughts since they are very much into the praxis of things.

In retrospect, most post-houses I came into were actually dark - as in no lights when the guys are editing.

Hmmm.

Hi sir Louie,

I think i found the solution to the green tint...:)
i think its a problem with the workflow, correct me if im wrong..

Im shooting with my Canon 20d using Adobe RGB..I edit it in photoshop using sRGB, when i print it at home as a checkprint, the green tint is not so obvious, when i give the file to the printer, the file retains its profile of sRGB..the printer follows my profile so eventually when he prints it large fomat, it blows up the greens.

My solution was, after the RAW photo is downloaded from Camera Raw into Photoshop, i convert the file to Adobe RGB to retain the colors as captured..

Its been printing in the right colors so i think ive found the right solution :) hope this will be of help to others who have problems in color management