Explanation of softproof issue...
2008-07-14 by CDTobie@aol.com
Let me see if I can describe this in a way that makes sense...
An AdobeRGB or sRGB image in Photoshop is an ideal image, its only limits being the workingspace. The view of that image you see on screen is that ideal image, gamut-limited to your display's capabilities. The version of your same image that you see when you select a printer profile for softproofing now emulates your output on screen (again limited to the screen's capabilities, if they are less than the printer's in some areas). The fact that the original poster says that the softproof and the final print are reasonable matches would show that the softproof is more or less doing its job.
The tendency to then want the softproof to look just like the original image is a tricky one. The softproof's job is to show you the printed output, not the ideal image. Yes, it may be possible to then increase contrast and punch in an effort to make the softproof, at least within gamut, resemble the effect you get from the original image a bit more; thats one of the purposes of a printer profile, to allow this type of adjustment.
But the question that gets asked of me tends to be: why doesn't my softproof AUTOMATICALLY resemble my original image as much as possible? This question misses the point. If your printer/ink/media combination offers a perfect white, a perfect black, and incredibly saturated colors, then the difference between the original image and the softproof will be negligable; most people who print on glossy media with wide gamut inks don't even bother to use softproof mode, as their AdobeRGB image and their prints are so similar.
Its when your printer/ink/media combination does not offer that type of gamut that the softproof becomes less satisfactory. At that point the "punching up" that gets done to compensate is not just printer/ink/paper specific, it is, in some ways, image specific. You can add punch by increasing contrast, but only at the cost of shadow detail; if punch matters more to your image than shadow detail, thats a good choice, but the profile should NOT be doing that for you, as it is moving further from linearity and full range, to loss of detail for the sake of punchiness. Similarly, you can add saturation to the midsaturation colors, making the image more colorful, but only at the cost of detail in the high saturation areas of the image (turning bright red roses from detailed, but less saturated representations, to big, blank blobs of red). Again, for one use, or one image, this saturation increase may be a good choice, for others it will not.
So yes, expect a good match between your softproof and your print, and use the Ref Black and Ref White checkboxes to further improve this match if needed. But do not expect a "good match" between the initial image and the softproof; accept that the softproof is a print representation, and is your opportunity to make detail versus punch choices, without expecting the profile to automatically make them for you.
On the other hand, moving to the Saturation intent, and being sure that Black Point Compensation is OFF will assure you the brightest initial colors and punchiest initial blacks before any such manipulations are considered. Being sure that you are using and appropriate monitor luminance, under an appropriate amount of ambient light is another set of factors that can effect your softproofing, as is the use of a reasonable D50 proofing light for your comparisons.
C. David Tobie
WW Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor
CDTobie@datacolor.com
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
**************
Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!
(http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus00050000000112)
An AdobeRGB or sRGB image in Photoshop is an ideal image, its only limits being the workingspace. The view of that image you see on screen is that ideal image, gamut-limited to your display's capabilities. The version of your same image that you see when you select a printer profile for softproofing now emulates your output on screen (again limited to the screen's capabilities, if they are less than the printer's in some areas). The fact that the original poster says that the softproof and the final print are reasonable matches would show that the softproof is more or less doing its job.
The tendency to then want the softproof to look just like the original image is a tricky one. The softproof's job is to show you the printed output, not the ideal image. Yes, it may be possible to then increase contrast and punch in an effort to make the softproof, at least within gamut, resemble the effect you get from the original image a bit more; thats one of the purposes of a printer profile, to allow this type of adjustment.
But the question that gets asked of me tends to be: why doesn't my softproof AUTOMATICALLY resemble my original image as much as possible? This question misses the point. If your printer/ink/media combination offers a perfect white, a perfect black, and incredibly saturated colors, then the difference between the original image and the softproof will be negligable; most people who print on glossy media with wide gamut inks don't even bother to use softproof mode, as their AdobeRGB image and their prints are so similar.
Its when your printer/ink/media combination does not offer that type of gamut that the softproof becomes less satisfactory. At that point the "punching up" that gets done to compensate is not just printer/ink/paper specific, it is, in some ways, image specific. You can add punch by increasing contrast, but only at the cost of shadow detail; if punch matters more to your image than shadow detail, thats a good choice, but the profile should NOT be doing that for you, as it is moving further from linearity and full range, to loss of detail for the sake of punchiness. Similarly, you can add saturation to the midsaturation colors, making the image more colorful, but only at the cost of detail in the high saturation areas of the image (turning bright red roses from detailed, but less saturated representations, to big, blank blobs of red). Again, for one use, or one image, this saturation increase may be a good choice, for others it will not.
So yes, expect a good match between your softproof and your print, and use the Ref Black and Ref White checkboxes to further improve this match if needed. But do not expect a "good match" between the initial image and the softproof; accept that the softproof is a print representation, and is your opportunity to make detail versus punch choices, without expecting the profile to automatically make them for you.
On the other hand, moving to the Saturation intent, and being sure that Black Point Compensation is OFF will assure you the brightest initial colors and punchiest initial blacks before any such manipulations are considered. Being sure that you are using and appropriate monitor luminance, under an appropriate amount of ambient light is another set of factors that can effect your softproofing, as is the use of a reasonable D50 proofing light for your comparisons.
C. David Tobie
WW Product Technology Manager
Digital Imaging & Home Theater
Datacolor
CDTobie@datacolor.com
www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
**************
Get the scoop on last night's hottest shows and the live music scene in your area - Check out TourTracker.com!
(http://www.tourtracker.com?NCID=aolmus00050000000112)