Yahoo Groups archive

Datacolor User to User Support Group.

Index last updated: 2026-04-28 23:18 UTC

Thread

Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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.

Re: [colorvision_group] Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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@...

Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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

Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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
Show quoted textHide quoted text
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
>
>
>

RE: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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
Show quoted textHide quoted text
-----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.

Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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

Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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

Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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

RE: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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
Show quoted textHide quoted text
-----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.<<<

Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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@...
Show quoted textHide quoted text
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
>
>
>

Re: [colorvision_group] Re: Why "Saturation" for rendering intent w. Spyder3Print?

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

Re: hardware calibration

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.

Re: [colorvision_group] Re: hardware calibration

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@...

Move to quarantaine

This moves the raw source file on disk only. The archive index is not changed automatically, so you still need to run a manual refresh afterward.