Date   

Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Chris Murphy <lists@...>
 

Now I am confused. I have Colorsync 3.0 but when I open the control panel I
have only two tabs, one is Profiles the other is CMM. The options for
Profile tab are the following: RGB, CMYK, Grayscale Defaults & Lab Profile.
Nowhere does the option of "Display Profile" come up.
In the ColorSync control panel, click on the Profiles tab. The first
pop-up has two options:

Default Profiles for Documents
Profiles for Standard Devices

You need to select Profiles for Standard Devices and in there you have
four pop-ups: Input, Display, Output, Proofer

So I'm referring to the Display pop-up.


However in PS 6.0 when I open the Color Settings window > RGB working space
popup menu I do have the "monitor bla bla my monitor calibration" at the top
of that screen with the "colorsync RGB - Adobe RGB" set, this is according
to Andrews post. Which is correct or both?
That's fine. This means that your working space is set to Adobe RGB and
that's the profile that is getting embedded in your images. That's a good
space to work in. The fact your monitor profile appears at the very top
of the pop-up (but is not the one selected) just indicates Photoshop is
aware of your monitor profile and is using it for display compensation.


Chris Murphy


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Christine Holzmann <tekila@...>
 

Chris,
Thank you VERY much!! That was a VERY helpful explanation. It really helped to clarify everything for me.....:)


Crissi
_____________________________

>I am just curious as to where the Monitor Calibration profile is
taken into account. In PS 5, it was in the RGB setup dialogue box.
A couple of anal retentive points (seeing as I'm officially A.R.):

It's important not to confuse calibration and profiling. They are two
totally different things. So what you're wondering is about the monitor
profile, equivalent to saying the monitor's ICC profile.

It's always been located in the ColorSync control panel. Version 3.0 of
ColorSync still has it in the ColorSync control panel, but if you want to
change it you need to go to the Monitors control panel.

In Photoshop 5 you could go to RGB Setup to see that Photoshop was
grabbing the appropriate monitor profile from ColorSync. You couldn't
actually select it here.

In Photoshop 6 they removed this because Photoshop 6 can do something
previous versions of Photoshop can't do. Use more than one monitor
profile at one time. Because of this they don't have room to display each
monitor's profile. For example with Photoshop 5, you could only select
one monitor profile even if you had two monitors attached to your Mac.
Photoshop 6 allows you to use a new feature in ColorSync 3 that lets you
select a monitor profile for each monitor connected to your Mac.

So what you want to do is go to the ColorSync control panel and make sure
it has your monitor profile selected there as the System Profile if you
are using ColorSync 2.6.1 or younger. This is renamed "Display Profile"
if you are using ColorSync 3.0 or higher.


(I really feel dumb asking this so please bear
with me...:)
There are no stupid questions. It's worse to have a question and not ask,
and then not have the answer.


Chris Murphy

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
colortheory-unsubscribe@egroups.com
--
DESIGN EDITOR @ The Citizen News
http://www.thecitizennews.com

DIGITAL/GRAPHIC ARTIST
http://www.crissi.com


Re: untagged tiff image 300 ppi, Opens at 72 ppi on p.s.6 (John Opitz)

Andrew Rodney <andrew@...>
 

The DCS cameras write a “special” Tiff file that really has a small B&W (color in newer cameras) preview of the file. In other words, the files you get off the DCS cameras are proprietary. There’s no color info in the file at all; it’s a grayscale file. The Acquire module is what allows you to actually end up with a real Tiff or other color file. Kodak realized that some users may not have either Photoshop or the Acquire module so what they do is write a tiny tiff header in the proprietary DCS file. That allows an art director or someone without the acquire module to at least double click on the DCS file and get some idea what’s in there. If you want the full rez file, you need to do an acquire, interpolate the color and save that data to whatever file format you wish.

Andrew Rodney


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Christine Holzmann <tekila@...>
 

Andrew,
Thank you....:)
That makes sense. My mind can rest at peace now. (Now all that is worrying my is where I can find the "blur option" for drop shadows in PS 6 as it was in PS 5. But I know that isn't a question for this list. If you DO have the time could you answer that at some stage too?? If not, I understand...:)

Crissi
______________________________________________





on 1/8/01 2:41 PM, Christine Holzmann at tekila@... wrote:
I selected ColorMatch as my RGB working space in that area, since I
used ColorMatch as my RGB working space in PS 5. Is this not the
correct thing to do?? Do I thus have to choose between using
Colormatch (or whatever the preferred working space is) or the
monitor profile??

That's correct. Load ColorMatch if that's what you like to use to edit your files. The display profile is ONLY used for preview purposes although in Photoshop 6, as you can see, you could load your display profile as your editing space (DON'T do that). But as you can see, the profile is there so you can at least visually see that Photoshop is using a certain display profile that you picked in Monitors (or as I somewhat incorrectly stated in the last post, ColorSync).
Actually, you pick the profile in Monitors (under OS9) and then it does show up in ColorSync to indicate it's being used on a system level, AND then Photoshop sees that and shows you this as well in the RGB Popup menu.

Andrew Rodney
eGroups Sponsor

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
colortheory-unsubscribe@...

--
DESIGN EDITOR @ The Citizen News
http://www.thecitizennews.com

DIGITAL/GRAPHIC ARTIST
http://www.crissi.com


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Chris Murphy <lists@...>
 

I selected ColorMatch as my RGB working space in that area, since I
used ColorMatch as my RGB working space in PS 5. Is this not the
correct thing to do??
That's fine.


Do I thus have to choose between using
Colormatch (or whatever the preferred working space is) or the
monitor profile??
Yes. Either or. I highly recommend NOT selecting your monitor for use as
a working space.


Chris Murphy


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Andrew Rodney <andrew@...>
 

on 1/8/01 2:41 PM, Christine Holzmann at tekila@... wrote:

I selected ColorMatch as my RGB working space in that area, since I
used ColorMatch as my RGB working space in PS 5. Is this not the
correct thing to do?? Do I thus have to choose between using
Colormatch (or whatever the preferred working space is) or the
monitor profile??

That’s correct. Load ColorMatch if that’s what you like to use to edit your files. The display profile is ONLY used for preview purposes although in Photoshop 6, as you can see, you could load your display profile as your editing space (DON’T do that). But as you can see, the profile is there so you can at least visually see that Photoshop is using a certain display profile that you picked in Monitors (or as I somewhat incorrectly stated in the last post, ColorSync).
Actually, you pick the profile in Monitors (under OS9) and then it does show up in ColorSync to indicate it’s being used on a system level, AND then Photoshop sees that and shows you this as well in the RGB Popup menu.

Andrew Rodney


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Chris Murphy <lists@...>
 

I am just curious as to where the Monitor Calibration profile is
taken into account. In PS 5, it was in the RGB setup dialogue box.
A couple of anal retentive points (seeing as I'm officially A.R.):

It's important not to confuse calibration and profiling. They are two
totally different things. So what you're wondering is about the monitor
profile, equivalent to saying the monitor's ICC profile.

It's always been located in the ColorSync control panel. Version 3.0 of
ColorSync still has it in the ColorSync control panel, but if you want to
change it you need to go to the Monitors control panel.

In Photoshop 5 you could go to RGB Setup to see that Photoshop was
grabbing the appropriate monitor profile from ColorSync. You couldn't
actually select it here.

In Photoshop 6 they removed this because Photoshop 6 can do something
previous versions of Photoshop can't do. Use more than one monitor
profile at one time. Because of this they don't have room to display each
monitor's profile. For example with Photoshop 5, you could only select
one monitor profile even if you had two monitors attached to your Mac.
Photoshop 6 allows you to use a new feature in ColorSync 3 that lets you
select a monitor profile for each monitor connected to your Mac.

So what you want to do is go to the ColorSync control panel and make sure
it has your monitor profile selected there as the System Profile if you
are using ColorSync 2.6.1 or younger. This is renamed "Display Profile"
if you are using ColorSync 3.0 or higher.


(I really feel dumb asking this so please bear
with me...:)
There are no stupid questions. It's worse to have a question and not ask,
and then not have the answer.


Chris Murphy


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Christine Holzmann <tekila@...>
 

I selected ColorMatch as my RGB working space in that area, since I used ColorMatch as my RGB working space in PS 5. Is this not the correct thing to do?? Do I thus have to choose between using Colormatch (or whatever the preferred working space is) or the monitor profile??

Crissi
__________________________________________

on 1/8/01 2:24 PM, Christine Holzmann at tekila@mindspring.com wrote:

Hi all,
This may sound like a dumb question, but this is my first day using
Photoshop 6.0 (having upgraded from PS 5.02) and I am still busy
going throught the manual.
I am just curious as to where the Monitor Calibration profile is
taken into account. In PS 5, it was in the RGB setup dialogue box.
In PS 6, I cannot find it.....
Go into your Color Settings and click on the RGB Working Space popup menu
and you'll see towards the top a label that says "Monitor RGB - bla bla"
(where bla bla is the name of the profile you loaded in ColorSync).

Andrew Rodney
--
DESIGN EDITOR @ The Citizen News
http://www.thecitizennews.com

DIGITAL/GRAPHIC ARTIST
http://www.crissi.com


untagged tiff image 300 ppi, Opens at 72 ppi on p.s.6 (John Opitz)

susan opitz <jas10286@...>
 

Thanking all of you,for your input.
                           
                           This is what was going on with those tiff files. They were born from a Kodak professional dcs315 digital camera (I know it's outdated and it's a low end professional). How I know this. I have one those cameras.The tiffs born from those cameras need the plug-in (file format,from Kodak)for the file. I did not know at the time where the files came from and I just got the 6 update (did not put the plug-in in yet. Had it in for 5.5). Another photographer (not hip to digital or Photoshop) gave me the files to work on.(passing the buck. That buck is going to lead into a raise). I tried the file>open command (in p.s.6)and no luck. Opened at 72ppi (file size 88kb. I think.) When I saved the file in 6 it saved it at 72.Opened up 5.5 and made a duplicate of the tiff (1.6mb file:original) and saved it as a tiff (no profile embedded). When saved in 5.5. File size increased to 3.6mb.(this is where a red flag went off in my head: compression.) When opened in p.s.6 It opened up at 300 ppi (3.6mb file). P.s.6 was reading it in tiff format. Same file sizes I have when using that camera. Btw, I opened other tiff files (not born from the dcs315) with no opening problems in p.s.6. Now when I installed the plug-in (dcs file format) in p.s.6 and I open up both files, 1.6(compressed) and the 3.6(uncompressed), p.s handles the 1.6 file as a dcs file format and the 3.6 file as tiff format.(not dcs file format).Both opening at 300ppi(3.6mb).Also noted when I duplicated the tiff file when in 5.5,if I did not have the plug-in installed it would still stay compressed.
             I got my camera (used $150.00, no booklet,no information on it) just before Christmas. Downloaded the firmware and information on it from Kodak.So working with a digital is new to me. I been using P.S. since 5.0 just came out.
              One thing I learned from this is when using the dcs. Make sure I open that tiff(compressed) file> then save it as a tiff(uncompressed).(as long as I have the plug-in(dcs file format) loaded in Photoshop). So when used(tiff file) by others they will not have the same problem opening it.
               If anyone has some input on this,please do !
               What I like to know is,if other digital cameras have a file formatting that is used just for theirs? So if I get one of these files again I'll know what plug-in to be used. And if these few people that are having problems with tiff files, could they be coming from files like the dcs 315 !?
                I didn't  use Dan's permanent method :delete System Folder: Preferences>File Exchange Preferences, and then rebuild the desktop file or download creator changer. When I called a Kodak tech, Jen (I called about formatting a new card with new firmware) she had told me that the tiff files from the dcs315, the plug-in would have to be used to uncompressed them. I ask her what happens when someone gets a tiff files like that, and has the same problem.? Not knowing where it came from? She said: "You have to ask where it came from". That's the horror! What happens when that person,giving it to you,......they don't know!? Delete System Folder: Preferences>File Exchange Preferences, and then rebuild the desktop file or download creator changer ?!
      I'll finish by saying that I'll be looking for Chris and Andrew's updates on p.s.6 color management and buying Dan's new book(glade to see it comes with a cd,this time. Love his sense of humor in the book as well) on p.s.6. Learned a lot from you guy's(and from others on the list). You really get into it !
      
                                           John Opitz
                


Re: Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Andrew Rodney <andrew@...>
 

on 1/8/01 2:24 PM, Christine Holzmann at tekila@mindspring.com wrote:

Hi all,
This may sound like a dumb question, but this is my first day using
Photoshop 6.0 (having upgraded from PS 5.02) and I am still busy
going throught the manual.
I am just curious as to where the Monitor Calibration profile is
taken into account. In PS 5, it was in the RGB setup dialogue box.
In PS 6, I cannot find it.....
Go into your Color Settings and click on the RGB Working Space popup menu
and you'll see towards the top a label that says "Monitor RGB - bla bla"
(where bla bla is the name of the profile you loaded in ColorSync).

Andrew Rodney


Where is the monitor calibration profile taken into account in PS 6.0

Christine Holzmann <tekila@...>
 

Hi all,
This may sound like a dumb question, but this is my first day using Photoshop 6.0 (having upgraded from PS 5.02) and I am still busy going throught the manual.
I am just curious as to where the Monitor Calibration profile is taken into account. In PS 5, it was in the RGB setup dialogue box.
In PS 6, I cannot find it.....do I need to worry about this?? Is PS 6 set up so that the Monitor calibration profile is automatically taken into account somehow?? (I really feel dumb asking this so please bear with me...:)

By the way Dan, thank you for your explanation and help about the PS 6 color settings in your column "99 Layers and counting" in Electronic Publishing. It was VERY HELPFUL and made me that much more confident when that first screen appeared concerning the color settings straight after installing PS 6...:)


Crissi
_____________________________________
--
DESIGN EDITOR @ The Citizen News
http://www.thecitizennews.com

DIGITAL/GRAPHIC ARTIST
http://www.crissi.com


Re: The Wide Wide World of Color

jsweengatf@...
 

In a message dated 01/08/2001 4:15:57 PM Eastern Standard Time,
kbrecken@... writes:


Its simply what the individual that pays the bill sees no plotted target
within any color model described with a numeric breakdown, be it LAB.,
RGB, CMYK or otherwise will change that interpretation


HOWEVER,

Once a physical sample (typical in a auto manufacturing, textile, paint,
plastic industries...) is agreed upon, measurement and color data take over,
especially when push comes to shove --

In printing, we have TR-001 colorimetric characterization of web offset
printing,
for example, and ISO 2856, standard method of measuring ink color and
strength....
CGATS.4 and .5 have been around for some time now -- our standards for
MEASURING (densitometric and colorimeric).

SWOP Certified Proofing Systems are proven capaple of making "SWOP" proofs,
form properly prepared files or films (www.swop.org).

In or digital, ditribute then print, short-run world, "print by numbers" and
"color by numbers" is needed more than ever.

My $ .02,

John Sweeney
Director color measurement systems
Graphics Microsystems, Inc.


Re: Is it really worth it?? THANKS GUYS!!

They Call Me Ping!
 

Thanks SO much to Terry and Chirs for taking time to answer my post! I
know that most of these are things that cannot be resolved in this
group or via email, but I do appreciate the tips...

I am a believer (in Color Management), I just have to sell it to the
management here. At least now I have a "game plan", Thanks again for
the excellent advice! :)


Re: The Wide Wide World of Color

Gordon Pritchard <gordon_pritchard@...>
 

If color can be measured then why can't it be "argued, predicted or
directed"?

gordon pritchard

----------
From: KAB
Sent: Sunday, January 7, 2001 3:55 PM
To: colortheory@egroups.com
Subject: [colortheory] The Wide Wide World of Color

Hi to all,

As a new member I'll be interested and at times no doubt entertained by
all opinions and comments pertaining to color theory, color correction,
scanning, ICC profiles, color management, workflow and the like....

I'm interested because I can gain knowledge and hopefully share a bit as
well, I 'll be entertained because like many of you, my opinions may
fuel a few passionate threads.

The way I see it, color can't be argued, predicted or directed, it is
not so much a science as it is personal expression, and gut instinct.
The science is often a crutch, a cold document of technical explanations
for "how to" rather than the bold exploration of "why not"


Kevin


To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
colortheory-unsubscribe@egroups.com




Re: The Wide Wide World of Color

KAB <kbrecken@...>
 

Gorton Pritchard wrote:

If color can be measured then why can't it be "argued, predicted or directed"?

gordon pritchard
_________________

Gord,

good question,

I think it cant be argued because of visual perception & personal preference,
outside of the math and numeric's who's to say the sky is blue?, it
might be
purple to some, is the grass green ? and that pumpkin is it red or orange.?

Its simply what the individual that pays the bill sees no plotted target
within any color model described with a numeric breakdown, be it LAB.,
RGB, CMYK or otherwise will change that interpretation

I think it cant be predicted because of that influence and all the other
influences ..day t o day ink set to ink set, device to device pressmen to
pressmen its all a "best guess" "shot in the dark" and "I hope it runs well"
scenario anyone that thinks they have a recipe for perfect color is simply
just not humbled by experience.

It cant be directed because the impacts can't be predicted,

I don't dismiss the technology or the science but with out knowledge and
experience a canned solution be it CM or otherwise is just a lazy shortcut,
just one more buffer behind the real issue surrounding color accuracy and
consistency.


respectfully

Kevin


ICC(K)

gowens01@...
 

On Saturday I talked with the owner of the photo lab I use. I asked if
the new Noritsu 2711 was using ICC profiles. the answer was, "What is a
ICC profile." I asked if they were using Kodak ColorFlow. I was told
there are five programs working in the background. I've been asking
what is the output resolution of this equipment. Didn't know. Got the
answer off my Electronic Publishing calender, 400 dpi. I asked if they
could take a Genuine Fractals file. No.

I went then went over to the printer and asked him if he was using ICC
profiles. He gave me a flat NO! I asked for pricing on 4X6 mailers. He
got out a third party Catalog. There information said could send a
picture but nothing about sending my own file.

On Friday I had a customer call and order some pictures for
publication. She wondered if she was purchasing the correct size. When
she read the photo guidelines ther was nothing about image size and the
information indicated that "no digital file would be accepted." (I
could have scanned and e-mailed those negs in 15 minutes).

Think of this in terms of communication, education, and training.

Gary Owens


The Wide Wide World of Color

KAB <kbrecken@...>
 

Hi to all,

As a new member I'll be interested and at times no doubt entertained by
all opinions and comments pertaining to color theory, color correction,
scanning, ICC profiles, color management, workflow and the like....

I'm interested because I can gain knowledge and hopefully share a bit as
well, I 'll be entertained because like many of you, my opinions may
fuel a few passionate threads.

The way I see it, color can't be argued, predicted or directed, it is
not so much a science as it is personal expression, and gut instinct.
The science is often a crutch, a cold document of technical explanations
for "how to" rather than the bold exploration of "why not"


Kevin


Re: Thanks...Dot Gain & ICC Profiles

samarsh@...
 

Thank you Bob, Chris & Dan (and any future posts).

We only upgraded to 5.5 from 4 about five months ago, and the
insanities of day to day work do not let me test everything as well
as I would like before it is put into use. I have been 'reasearching'
the upgrade since version 5 was first available as a demo - and this
is the first time I have heard about this issue! I guess I've been
looking in the wrong places.

Once again, I would like to thank the list for their time and shared
knowledge.

Regards,

Stephen Marsh.


Re: untagged tiff image

Chris Murphy <lists@...>
 

(Just be aware that my not using a profile, it very likely will LOOK
different between Photoshop 5 and 6, and therefore will separately
differently between 5 and 6.)
What are the differences in how PS5 and PS6 handles an untagged image? I
thought they both used the working RGB space to display the image.
You might also ask if I speak English - geez, I wonder if it's possible
for me to make MORE typos than that. my=by, separately=separate

Photoshop 5 only differentiates between tagged and untagged images when
you OPEN them. Once they are opened, they are handled identically. That's
part of the problem with Photoshop 5. The working space (RGB or CMYK)
applies to *all* open documents.

The working space concept does NOT apply to all open documents in
Photoshop 6. It applies only to: 1.) New documents that you create using
the File:New command. 2.) Images that are untagged, i.e. they are marked
as "Do Not Color Manage." In all other cases, whatever the Assigned
Profile is for a document is the basis for display and conversion (the
Assigned Profile is the source profile for an open document).

So this means that 10 RGB images can have 10 *different* profiles
assigned to them and they can be opened and displayed at the same time,
and the RGB working space will not apply to them.

Plus: You don't have to worry as much about managing embedded profiles.
When you open an image that has a ColorMatch RGB profile in it, that
profile is preserved even if it conflicts with your RGB working space of
Adobe RGB (for example). The embedded profile is used for preview and
conversion and reembedding when you save the image. This is great because
those who don't care *don't* get undocumented conversions. Those who *do*
care, get to use the embedded profile without having to think about it.

Minus: In order to accomodate many workflows, there are three color
management policies that change this behavior of Photoshop 6, making it a
little more complicated to understand (at least initially).


Also, say I open an image from a non-ICC scanner, convert it to my RGB
working space (i.e ColorMatch RGB), edit it to my satisfaction and then
embed that profile when saving. Is that profile of any use to the next
person who opens it? IOW, is it now an accurate description of that images'
color space?
Short answer:
If you are working on a calibrated and profiled monitor while doing your
editing work, yes that is an accuracte description of that image's color
space. Someone else with a calibrated & profiled monitor who chooses to
recognize and use that embedded profile will see it substantially the
same as you did.

The catch:
It is of use to other people who open it *if* they are aware of how to
take advantage of it. The idea of automatic color management that baby
sits people to the nth degree I think is a long ways off and is not
represented by ICC based color management.

The problem with answering this question is that how helpful it is
depends GREATLY on the individual receiving the file, and what program
they open it in, and the settings of that program. For example:

Photoshop 4: this person has a version of Photoshop that has no idea what
an embedded profile is and therefore it will ignore it. So for this
person it neither helps nor hinders.

Photoshop 5: Photoshop knows what embedded profiles are, but it can be
configured to ignore them. So whether it helps the person depends on
their settings, and how much knowledge they have about Photoshop 5's
rather convoluted color management. Again, the vast majority of the time
it neither helps nor hinders.

If they are interested in seeing what you saw on your monitor, then they
will make an effort to determine what the embedded profile is, and ensure
that they use it. Their monitor also being calibrated and profiled will
allow them to display your image and see it on their monitor the same way
you did. Here there is a clear benefit even if it occurs a minority of
the time.

Photoshop 6: Pretty much the same as with Photoshop 5 except there is
practically no potential for danger (i.e. Photoshop 5 made it second
nature to embed incorrect profiles). It's possible to configure it to
ignore embedded profiles. It's possible to configure it to preserve
embedded profiles (which is actually an easier, more automated way to
deal with embedded profiles instead of having to be really involved like
with Photoshop 5).


Chris Murphy


Re: untagged tiff image

Dave Badger <dbadge@...>
 

Chris Murphy Wrote:
I would
try saving out a new copy of the 300ppi TIFF in Photoshop 5.5 without a
profile attached, then reopen in Photoshop 6.

(Just be aware that my not using a profile, it very likely will LOOK
different between Photoshop 5 and 6, and therefore will separately
differently between 5 and 6.)
What are the differences in how PS5 and PS6 handles an untagged image? I
thought they both used the working RGB space to display the image.

Also, say I open an image from a non-ICC scanner, convert it to my RGB
working space (i.e ColorMatch RGB), edit it to my satisfaction and then
embed that profile when saving. Is that profile of any use to the next
person who opens it? IOW, is it now an accurate description of that images'
color space?


Dave Badger