Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?
2009-03-16 by chi_cruiser
Yahoo Groups archive
Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:18 UTC
Thread
2009-03-16 by chi_cruiser
I noticed from the Spyder3Print video at Datacolor, that the "saturation" setting under rendering intent in Photoshop is needed for Spyder3Print generated ICC profiles. Is this setting just for generating the profile target or is it to be used in ALL future printing with the generated ICC profile? If so, is this setting just unique for Spyder3Print profiles? I'm asking because this setting is NOT recommended in any of my Photoshop books or online courses, except for special effects. Thanks.
2009-03-16 by C D Tobie
On Mar 16, 2009, at 10:12 AM, chi_cruiser wrote: > I noticed from the Spyder3Print video at Datacolor, that the > "saturation" setting under rendering intent in Photoshop is needed > for Spyder3Print generated ICC profiles. Its not needed, its just recommended as a good intent to try... > > Is this setting just for generating the profile target or is it to > be used in ALL future printing with the generated ICC profile? If > so, is this setting just unique for Spyder3Print profiles? I'm > asking because this setting is NOT recommended in any of my > Photoshop books or online courses, except for special effects. Thanks. Profile creation is not intent based; all the intents are created. Its when you go to use the profile that intent selection occurs. So there is no issue about what intent is selected at the time you print a target, measure the target, or build the profile, only at the point in time when you use the profile to print an image. At that time, we suggest you try the Saturation intent, as it may be just what you want. If we don't suggest this people inevitably use only RelCol or Percept intents... C. David Tobie Global Product Technology Manager Digital Imaging & Home Theater CDTobie@...
2009-03-17 by Myron Gochnauer
> Profile creation is not intent based; all the intents are created. Its > when you go to use the profile that intent selection occurs. > So there is no issue about what intent is selected at the time you > print a target, measure the target, or build the profile, only at the > point in time when you use the profile to print an image. If this information is not highlighted in the documentation, it should be. It may be obvious from the actual profiling process, but it is easily forgotten... all I could remember is that CDavid said at one point that "Saturation" intent was "recommended", so I have used that exclusively (unless the printing program didn't offer it). I think I simply do not understand with these "Intents" do. I've been using Saturation Intent for ordinary scenic photography and portraits, which call for subtle colors and transitions, unlike "charts and graphs" that Adobe says Saturation is good for. And my results are, it seems, very good. So when does the "Intent" actually kick in? When would it make a difference? When the printing gamut does not match the gamut of the image, and colors must be adjusted to fit? My male red/green weakness makes me suspicious of my color judgments, so it's difficult for me to just try these things and "see". > ... we suggest you try the Saturation intent, as it may be just what > you want. Why wouldn't this be something you would suggest only if "Perceptual Intent" --- whose description corresponds with what most photographers are looking for --- is problematic in some specifiable way? Myron
2009-03-17 by Sat Tara Khalsa
Rendering intents just determine how the system handles out-of-gamut colors in the printing process. (If the gamut of your photo includes colors that your printer can't reproduce... and it almost always does....) In other words, the rendering intent just tells your printer how to "fake it" in the most pleasing way by explaining to the printer that "Yes, this red is the best substitute for the out-of-gamut red in your photo". It's applied after the ICC profile is created because the profile tells the system how to optimize the printer's gamut for accuracy and the rendering intent tells the system what to do when colors exist in the image that even the most accurate printer gamut isn't capable of reproducing with that printer. There's nothing sacred about one rendering intent vs. another - and the differences tend toward the subtle. If you have Spyder3 Print, the soft proofing checkbox gives you a way to compare them (sort of - they're still limited by monitor gamut) Conventional wisdom is that relative colorimetric tends to reproduce the relationship of colors more pleasingly, while perceptual tends to reproduce range of luminance more pleasingly. Don't know about the advantage of Saturation, but it does look good with the S3 test images on my printer. Absolute just chops the out of gamut colors, and generally looks the worst. If you don't mind blowing 4 sheets of paper and some ink, just print the S3 Print test image page with each intent and look at the differences. Decide for yourself what you like. stsk
On Mar 17, 2009, at 6:03 AM, Myron Gochnauer wrote: >> Profile creation is not intent based; all the intents are created. >> Its >> when you go to use the profile that intent selection occurs. > >> So there is no issue about what intent is selected at the time you >> print a target, measure the target, or build the profile, only at the >> point in time when you use the profile to print an image. > > If this information is not highlighted in the documentation, it > should be. It may be obvious from the actual profiling process, but > it is easily forgotten... all I could remember is that CDavid said > at one point that "Saturation" intent was "recommended", so I have > used that exclusively (unless the printing program didn't offer it). > > I think I simply do not understand with these "Intents" do. I've > been using Saturation Intent for ordinary scenic photography and > portraits, which call for subtle colors and transitions, unlike > "charts and graphs" that Adobe says Saturation is good for. And my > results are, it seems, very good. > > So when does the "Intent" actually kick in? When would it make a > difference? When the printing gamut does not match the gamut of the > image, and colors must be adjusted to fit? > > My male red/green weakness makes me suspicious of my color > judgments, so it's difficult for me to just try these things and > "see". > >> ... we suggest you try the Saturation intent, as it may be just what >> you want. > > Why wouldn't this be something you would suggest only if "Perceptual > Intent" --- whose description corresponds with what most > photographers are looking for --- is problem! atic in some > specifiable way? > > Myron > > >
2009-03-17 by PJS
Here's a primer on rendering intents by IBM: " Rendering intents Rendering intents indicate what you want a printer to do with colors that are outside its gamut. ICC profiles support these rendering intents: a.. Perceptual If an image includes any colors that are out-of-gamut for the printer, the printer adjusts all the colors in the image, even those that are already in the gamut of the printer, so they are all in-gamut and maintain their color relationships to each other. The result is an image that is visually pleasing, but is not colorimetrically accurate. The perceptual rendering intent is useful for general reproduction of images, particularly photographs. b.. Saturation If a print job includes colors that are out-of-gamut for the printer, the printer replaces the out-of-gamut color with the nearest color in the gamut. It also adjusts the in-gamut colors so that they are more vivid. Saturation is the least used rendering intent, but it is useful for business graphics, such as images that contain charts or diagrams. c.. Media-relative colorimetric If a print job includes colors that are out-of-gamut for the printer, the printer substitutes the nearest in-gamut color; in-gamut colors are not adjusted. Colors printed on papers with different media white points might not match visually. The media white point is the color of the paper that the print job is printed on. For example, if you print an image on white paper, on off-white paper, and on blue paper using the media-relative colorimetric rendering intent, the printer uses the same amount of ink or toner for each one and the resulting color is technically the same. However, the images might seem different because your eyes adjust to the color of the background and interpret the color differently. This rendering intent is typically used for vector graphics. d.. Absolute colorimetric All colors are mapped using the same method as the media-relative colorimetric rendering intent, however, all colors are adjusted for the media white point. For example, if you print an image on white paper, on off-white paper, and on blue paper using the media-relative colorimetric rendering intent, the printer adjusts the ink or toner used for each one. The resulting color is technically not same, but the images might look the same because of the way your eyes interpret them in relationship to the color of the paper. The absolute colorimetric rendering intent is typically used for logos. a.. Related concepts b.. Gamut and rendering intent Every device has a gamut, a range of colors or shades of colors that it can display or print. Some devices have larger gamuts than others; some devices have gamuts that are similar sizes, but that contain slightly different colors. When an image or a print job is created on a device with a gamut that is different from the printer, you can use a rendering intent to tell the printer how to adjust the colors that are outside the gamut of the printer." Source: http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/printer/v1r1/index.jsp?topic=/com.i bm.printers.plngcfgguideyuma/g6apcmst181.htm pjs "Light makes photography. Embrace light. Admire it. Love it. But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography." George Eastman
-----Original Message----- From: Myron Gochnauer Subject: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print? I think I simply do not understand with these "Intents" do. I've been using Saturation Intent for ordinary scenic photography and portraits, which call for subtle colors and transitions, unlike "charts and graphs" that Adobe says Saturation is good for. And my results are, it seems, very good.
2009-03-17 by David Miller
On Mar 17, 2009, at 11:12 AM, PJS wrote: > > Here's a primer on rendering intents by IBM: > <snip> It's things like this "primer" from IBM that gives people the wrong idea about rendering intents. (what does IBM really know about color printing...? :-) Particularly what they say about "Saturation" and business graphics. This is the same old tired line that people keep referring to when talking about "not" using Saturation when making photographic prints. There is no "rule" that says that Saturation rendering intents in printer profiles have to be "bad", or at least, unsuitable for printing anything other than business graphics and charts. Printer profiles contain data in each of their rendering intents that the printer profile software and/or printer manufacturer designs a certain way. There are general guidelines (not from IBM, but in the ICC specification) which are suggestions about what the different rendering intents in the profile should do, but software that creates printer profiles is free to put whatever it likes in any/all of the 3 "slots" in the profile that contain the data. It's really not useful to look at something written by IBM about this... my guess would be that this is from a document that's at least 10 years old. I can categorically tell you that, contrary to what this IBM document says, in-gamut colors are NOT adjusted to be more vivid in our profiles when the Saturation intent is chosen, and there is no rule in the ICC spec for printer profiles that says this should be happening, either. In the past, manufacturer's printer profiles may have been doing that with the Saturation intent (years ago), but in looking at more recent profiles done with more modern printer profiling software (other packages, not ours), I don't see the same kind of hugely objectionable color shifts in the Saturation intent that older profiles would have produced. *** Looking at the document that you're referencing... this is for a specific family of IBM printers. Not inkjets...! And not with any other profiles other than what IBM supplies for/with them. These laser printers will also be CMYK profiled devices (not RGB) and these are going to be limited gamut printers that aren't going to be useful for photographic printing. This is a document that is SPECIFICALLY about the "InfoPrint 4100 family of printers" which are "...laser, electrophotographic print technology". What they're saying is, I'm sure, correct and applicable for these IBM printers which are not only a different printing technology, but which have profiles created for them that will presumably match the descriptions for rendering intents in the document. None of this has anything to do with color inkjet printing using RGB printer profiles on wider gamut inkjets. David Miller Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions Datacolor
2009-03-17 by C D Tobie
On Mar 17, 2009, at 8:03 AM, Myron Gochnauer wrote: > I think I simply do not understand with these "Intents" do Intents, for the most part, decide how to print "unprintable" colors. If you can't reach that particular taxi-cab yellow, what available yellow would you prefer? The brightest one possible (Saturation intent), or the most literal one possible even if its rather dull (Relative Colorimetric), or one where all your other colors are blindly desaturated in case the cab yellow, or some other color, may exceed the printer's reach, so that all the desaturated colors will have appropriate relations to one another, even if none of them are literally correct (Perceptual, though we don't do it that way!) C. David Tobie Global Product Technology Manager Digital Imaging & Home Theater CDTobie@... Datacolor www.datacolor.com/Spyder3
2009-03-17 by John Vitollo
--- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> wrote: > > Intents, for the most part, decide how to print "unprintable" colors. > If you can't reach that particular taxi-cab yellow, what available > yellow would you prefer? The brightest one possible (Saturation > intent), or the most literal one possible even if its rather dull > (Relative Colorimetric), or one where all your other colors are > blindly desaturated in case the cab yellow, or some other color, may > exceed the printer's reach, so that all the desaturated colors will > have appropriate relations to one another, even if none of them are > literally correct (Perceptual, though we don't do it that way!) > > C. David Tobie > Global Product Technology Manager > Digital Imaging & Home Theater The above is the best explanation of color intents that I have ever read! Watch out Mark Twain! John
2009-03-17 by PJS
I respectfully disagree that the basic information presented in the article is misrepresentative of what color rendering does. Are you saying that a saturation intent is NOT more vivid than perceptual? If they are not, why does your partner, in the very next email sent to the forum, Mr. Tobie, say "The brightest one possible (Saturation intent)..."? Maybe we're into semantics. Brighter? Vivid? Six of one, 1/2 dozen of the other. The definitions in the article are sound. Maybe not how it is said in "inkjetspeak", but true to the concepts of rendering. FYI, here is how the International Color Consortium (for you plebes, that's what icc means) defines "Saturation Intent": "3.1.3 Saturation Intent The exact gamut mapping of the saturation intent is vendor specific and involves compromises such as trading off preservation of hue in order to preserve the vividness of pure colors. It is useful for images which contain objects such as charts or diagrams." Source: http://www.color.org/iccprofile.xalter I guess maybe they're still using that "same old line" as well..... pjs "Light makes photography. Embrace light. Admire it. Love it. But above all, know light. Know it for all you are worth, and you will know the key to photography." George Eastman
-----Original Message----- From: David Miller Subject: Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print? >>>It's things like this "primer" from IBM that gives people the wrong idea about rendering intents. (what does IBM really know about color printing...? :-) Particularly what they say about "Saturation" and business graphics. This is the same old tired line that people keep referring to when talking about "not" using Saturation when making photographic prints.<<<
2009-03-17 by Cdtobie
Though written, like much Twain, a bit peevishly... C. D. Tobie Global Product Technology Mngr. Digital Imaging & Home Theater Datacolor.com CDTobie@...
On Mar 17, 2009, at 7:33 PM, "John Vitollo" <jvlist@...> wrote: > --- In colorvision_group@yahoogroups.com, C D Tobie <CDTobie@...> > wrote: >> >> Intents, for the most part, decide how to print "unprintable" colors. >> If you can't reach that particular taxi-cab yellow, what available >> yellow would you prefer? The brightest one possible (Saturation >> intent), or the most literal one possible even if its rather dull >> (Relative Colorimetric), or one where all your other colors are >> blindly desaturated in case the cab yellow, or some other color, may >> exceed the printer's reach, so that all the desaturated colors will >> have appropriate relations to one another, even if none of them are >> literally correct (Perceptual, though we don't do it that way!) >> >> C. David Tobie >> Global Product Technology Manager >> Digital Imaging & Home Theater > > The above is the best explanation of color intents that I have ever > read! > > Watch out Mark Twain! > > John > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
2009-03-18 by David Miller
O > The definitions in the article are sound. > Some, but not all. Like the bit about using data in the Saturation intent to make in-gamut colors more vivid. Sorry, but, that's not in the ICC spec. So that part of the IBM definitions (which are specific for this printer; you're not quoting from an ICC spec, you're quoting from a specific IBM document for a specific printer with a specific profile and a specific kind of printing configuration, i.e. CMYK laser). > Maybe not how it is said in > "inkjetspeak", but true to the concepts of rendering. FYI, here is > how the > International Color Consortium (for you plebes, that's what icc means) > defines "Saturation Intent": > > "3.1.3 Saturation Intent > The exact gamut mapping of the saturation intent is vendor specific > and > involves compromises such as trading off preservation of hue in > order to > preserve the vividness of pure colors. It is useful for images which > contain > objects such as charts or diagrams." > > Source: > http://www.color.org/iccprofile.xalter > > I guess maybe they're still using that "same old line" as well..... > > Only if you misread what the ICC has written. Let's parse it more exactly...:-) See where it says "vendor specific"? That means: it's vendor specific; meaning, a vendor can decide to do whatever they want here, in order to "preserve the vividness of pure colors" by using "compromises such as the trading off of the preservation of hue". Maybe this isn't clear enough, so (a bit peevishly...:-), but also in good humor, and with all due respect), I'll just point it out again. Vendor-specific. There is no "rule" in the ICC spec that suggests what may, or should, be done here, or exactly how to go about accomplishing it by calculating data and putting it into the Saturation intent. Vendor-specific. Means: the vendor can be creative (or not); skillful (or not); put whatever data they feel is appropriate into the Saturation intent; to accomplish the general goal stated here: to preserve the vividness of pure colors. (Pure being taken to mean: highly saturated colors, and in particular, the RGBCMY primaries and the other colors that are near them as well). Vendor-specific means: your mileage will vary, depending on the vendor that you're using to build your profiles. Like us...:-) Or "them", whoever "them" may be. (Epson, Canon, HP, and/or whatever other vendor-specific software is being used to build the profiles). The results are expected to vary from vendor to vendor, because all vendor profiling algorithms will be different. There's no inkjetspeak involved here. There is one nice, small, cleanly-written paragraph in the ICC spec that you've presented here and this is exactly what it says. "The exact gamut mapping is vendor-specific", and that means the exact methods used to map out-of-gamut colors for the Saturation intent are based on the profiling algorithms of specific vendors. There is no rule or law about how the Saturation intent behaves; only the suggestion that the user will expect to get the best possible saturation when they use it. (Not re-adjusted saturation for in-gamut colors; or over-saturation, as much older ICC profiles produced with the Saturation intent, years ago; just the best saturation for Pure colors) *** That final line, about "useful for images which contain objects such as charts or diagrams" does NOT say that this technique should make the Saturation intent unfit for printing photographic images. It simply means that by mapping out-of-gamut colors (which will tend to include the "Pure" colors that are typically used in charts and diagrams, for vividness and contrast) as vividly as possible, the Saturation intent can be particularly useful for printing images which contain highly saturated, out-of-gamut colors (while at the same time, it recognizes that from a technical standpoint, there may be a trade-off in preservation of hue for those out-of-gamut colors.) You'll note that, unlike the IBM document that started this discussion, there is -no mention- in this paragraph from the ICC spec of any concept of changing the mapping of IN-GAMUT colors to also make them more vivid, which is where I really started to take objection to the IBM document. *** Conclusion: The Saturation intent data is vendor-specific, meaning: different vendors can choose to implement this any way they like. The overall concept of the Saturation intent is to produce the most vivid colors in the print for out-of-gamut colors. The ICC spec has no suggestions or requirements to make adjustments to in-gamut colors for the Saturation intent. The Saturation intent will give you the most saturated colors in your print, if you just so happen to be printing things like charts and diagrams which contain "pure" colors. For in-gamut colors, the data in our Saturation intent is perfectly appropriate for making photographic prints as well. David Miller Senior Software Developer, Digital Color Solutions Datacolor
2009-05-25 by Bob Frost
David or David, Does the Spyder3 Elite software recognise an Eizo monitor with hardware calibration and deal with it accordingly, or should I use my Spyder3 with the Eizo ColorNavigator software for best results? Bob F.
2009-05-25 by C D Tobie
On May 25, 2009, at 7:54 AM, Bob Frost wrote: > Does the Spyder3 Elite software recognise an Eizo monitor with > hardware > calibration and deal with it accordingly, or should I use my Spyder3 > with > the Eizo ColorNavigator software for best results? If you have only one display, it may be more convenient to use the Spyder with Eizo's software. Since the Eizo software doesn't deal with multiple monitors, you would need to do something else in that case. You choices include setting the gamma and whitepoint once with the Eizo software (so that you get the mimimized banding advantages of the internal corrections), then calibrating on top of that with Spyder3Elite for both displays; or purchasing a copy of ColorEyes Display, which will work with the Eizo internal LUTs, as well as with multiple diplays, and which can utilize the Spyder3 hardware. C. David Tobie Global Product Technology Manager Digital Imaging & Home Theater CDTobie@...