Paul,
You set up all the specifics with the workflow I presented exactly
the same way you do with the ColorSync workflow. Steps 0, 1 and 2 are
identical except for using the NAPP/A-RGB setting vs the ColorSync/
Generic-RGB settings. You can set up the same bundle of settings at
the printer as a one-step pick as well.
Regards the question, "..is there any real advantage..?":
In seeking enlightenment with a ColorSync workflow, I did the
experiment: took a test photo and printed six times as follows ...
---
Did a calibration check on the monitor with the Gretag-Macbeth Eye
One Display colorimeter, generated new profile (profile analysis
demonstrate it to be identical to 1 month old one for all practical
purposes) and set the screen to use it.
-
Image file converted from RAW and output with 16bit per channel RGB,
Adobe RGB color profile.
-
** I don't have an Epson 2200 to work with at present, only an HP
7960 for color output. The 7960 probably has a slightly larger gamut
(dye inks vs pigment inks) but I suspect that Epson's profiles for
the 2200 are a bit better since I know who produced them... ;-) **
Photoshop CS2 ColorSync color settings
Document profile converted to ColorSync Generic sRGB
print 1 - Photoshop controls color, HP Premium Plus Glossy paper, HP
driver ColorSync setting
print 2 - Printer controls color, HP Premium Plus Glossy paper, HP
driver ColorSync setting
Photoshop CS2 North America Prepress settings
Document profile retained as Adobe RGB (1998)
print 3 - Photoshop controls color, HP Premium Plus Glossy paper, HP
driver ColorSync setting
print 4 - printer controls color, HP Premium Plus Glossy paper, HP
driver ColorSync setting
print 5 - Photoshop controls color, HP Premium Plus Glossy paper, HP
driver ColorSmart III setting
print 6 - printer controls color, HP Premium Plus Glossy paper, HP
driver ColorSmart III setting
-
Results:
Print 5 is the clear odd man out. Glarey, higher gamma, yellowish
cast in shadows, more exaggerated whites.
Prints 1,2,3,4, & 6 are very close under standard tungsten room light.
.. Under kitchen flourescent lighting, 1 & 3 have brighter, cleaner
tones ...
shadow values go a little muddy; #3 is a bit warmer in faces and
shadow values.
.. Under balanced 5000 deg K viewing box, #3 and #1 present closest
by-eye match to screen.
.. Under shaded sunlight, 1,3,6 are again very close, with #3 being a
slightly closer eye-match.
My conclusion is that there is a small benefit from using A-RGB and
North America Pre-Press color settings. It's probably a greater
difference if you're working from a JPEG image. Here's the difference
in histogram profiles from Adobe RGB (16bit), and Generic sRGB
(16bit) - Generic sRGB (8bit) conversions:
http://homepage.mac.com/godders/profile-comparison.jpg
Note the relationship of the Red and Green left-side tails in the A-
RGB vs sRGB histograms ... sRGB is likely clipping a bit, it might
explain some of the subtle color shifting happening in the shadow
values.
The good news, of course, is that printing with *any* color
management scheme that uses at least decent profiles is going to
produce superior results to printing source files without color
management. I converted the file to 8bit, converted profile to sRGB
and output it as an untagged JPEG file. I then reopened it and told
Photoshop not to color manage it, produced two more prints... Not
even worth analyzing, the color balances are strikingly different
from the above 1,2,3,4,6 prints and don't match the screen display
very well at all.
In short, profiling the screen and using color management workflow
are the two fundamental keys to getting consistent, repeatable
output. As long as you're working with a decent color management
workflow and tools, you'll get results that shift only by subtleties.
The differences will become more significant depending upon specific
printer/ink/paper printing systems. Having the OS fully color
managed, as Mac OS X is, also presents an advantage in that more
applications will take advantage of embedded ICC profiles and render
photos with better accuracy.
Godfrey
On Sep 12, 2005, at 8:53 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wow! That's far more complex than using colorsynch workflow. I
merely go to page setup to select paper size and positiong, then
choose my paper in the print dialogue box and dial in the desired
resolution and color management. Having done that once, however, I
can save the paper with the resolution and color managment choices.
After that, it's a one step process. Is there any real advantage to
going through all that you've outlined below? I will have to give
it a try, but I can't really see anything in my prints that I would
want to change. I get exactly the results I want with no muss or fuss.
Paul
Godfrey wrote:
t's pretty much the same when working with Photoshop for both Mac OS
and Windows. Mac OS X's built in color management makes life easier,
but the workflow is the same.
0) calibrate monitor, whether you use a software utility or a
hardware colorimeter.
1) set up Photoshop's color preferences for a color managed workflow
(I use the "North American Pre-press defaults" as a basis and
customize that a little bit.)
2) When converting RAW format files, set the output colorspace to
match the working
colorspace you use in Photoshop.
3) When it comes time to print, use the "Print with Preview" command.
In that dialog, use
the Page Setup dialog to set printer parameters, the sizing and
other tools to center and
align the output, and use the color management options to pick
color management settings.
- set the popup to let Photoshop manage colors
- set the intent to "relative colormetric"
- pick the output profile per your printer/paper
That's all Photoshop controls.
- then press the Print button. Now you're in the print driver's
control space
In the print dialog, turn off all color management at the
printer.
