I know this is OT but I hope my friends on the Sports corner will be able to help me.
I often print at local Costco with lots of good results coming from their Fuji Frontier printer. I often stay lazy and even use their Auto setting with non-profile converted jpegs. Srgb original color space.
Assume I have a decently calibrated monitor.
Today I wanted to get better results so I used the specific location's Dry Creek printer profile not just for soft proofing but also ran them through Photoshop CS5 to Convert Profile for the specified Printer. Essentially followed the steps dome here: http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/profiles.htm When printed to Costco, Auto Adjust was set to Off.
My results were faded and low contrast and I can't figure out why. Essentially the print looked like what the display would look like if I opened the Converted jpeg in Internet Explorer that in turm displayed using srgb color space but with the jpeg numerical values from the converted file. (I was able to do this using original and converted files). Yet the Converted file displayed such like the original when opened back up in Photoshop using the managed color workspace of the converted jpeg.
One step in the process I recall as important is to uncheck the "Icc Profile" box when you are saving your image as a jpg after you have edited, soft-proofed, and converted to the output color profile.
Russ,
That entered my mind, but being that all the documentation on both the Fuji and Noritsu prints say that they Ignore any embedded profiles, I didn't bothe to turn off the box for embedding the profile.
However, even if I left it turned on, it would have embedded the Converted and this Printer profile that I targeted; Logically, what harm are you implying would happen (outside of a bug)
Also, had I unchecked the box and didn't embed the printer profile got embedded, and then opened the file in Photoshop again, it would no longer display properly, vs keeping the embedded profile and getting a warning when I open in Photoshop to remind myself this was the converted file. One additional small reason I didn't bother to uncheck box to stop embedding.
You are also at the mercy of the employee who last calibrated the frontier printer. If you monitor is calibrated and you are consistent in your color correcting the problem might not be on your end.
Good idea. But they recalibrated while I shopped and printed out two more shots, one more with Auto off, and one with Auto Correct On. The second post calibrated print had some subtle Red color improvement, and the Auto added slight contrast improvement. However all 3 far underwhelmed me which is why I can't figure it out. I bet if I sent the original preconverted and left Auto On, it would be 98% to my monitor not 75% that I a, trying to figure out the culprit for via this thread.?.
I just know that the instructions for using the Dry Creek ICC profiles used to be very specific about not embedding the profile. I seem to recall experiencing some difference between the two options when I've followed all the other steps to their directions. However, also in my experience, soft-proofing usually is enough, without converting the profile or worrying about anything else.
Russ Isabella wrote:
I just know that the instructions for using the Dry Creek ICC profiles used to be very specific about not embedding the profile. I seem to recall experiencing some difference between the two options when I've followed all the other steps to their directions. However, also in my experience, soft-proofing usually is enough, without converting the profile or worrying about anything else.
It is funny you say this. I usually do just as you say which is do the printing after soft proof without the Convert. And i Ise Auto too in this case. Just FYI , if you do this you will want to check=on the Reserve Values" box in the soft proof dialog. This then shows the soft proof as if the current file itself was printed. You are right this method is usually 95-98% perfect unless you have lots of shadow detail in the photo at which point I suggest the conversion.
I just submitted another small test case- orig , converted with and without Icc to see if there is a difference. The converted files look more orange than red if I open in IE with just its srgb assumption. To me, this implies the print has a strong red channel and thus the converted file used lower values. But, I am surprised because my 'poor' results from yesterdays converted file with Icc actually tinted weak in the red showing as more orange (or strong in the yellow). ?? Let's see how today's turn out without the Icc and I'll let you know.
I printed:
- original edited jpeg sRGB with and without Auto Correct On. They looked nearly the same since it was a well exposed and saturated image, and looked very much like my monitor.
- I then submitted the converted version of the image from Photoshop CS5 (using Convert to Profile and selected the same soft proofed icc for the printer. (I actually did this with and without Embed ICC = on). The two prints looked the same as expected since Fuji supposedly ignores embedded profiles.
o HOWEVER these profile converted prints looked very dull, de-saturated, poor contrast, and inaccurate Reds that looked more Orange than Red. Unacceptably bad.
o Another print I converted had similar results with similar poor quality traits.
I re-open the 3 files in Photoshop – the original looks as expected and matches the print, the Converted Profile with Embedded ICC opens and properly converts to sRGB work space and matches the original, but not the print. For the last version file that was converted with no Embedded ICC, I told Photoshop to simply assign a work space but not convert back to sRGB. The screen now “incorrectly” matched the print (but with the poor traits).
Are you able to find a flaw in my process? I just want to print accurate prints that match my color-managed workflow.
To me, it seems like the Fuji printers are somehow printing the converted color jpeg images as if they were still sRGB color space (the way they display on my monitor when in sRGB assigned or Internet Explorer (only SRGB) is pretty much the same as the poor prints.
WHY would the converted jpegs have such drastic differences when printed ? ( using the jpegs with color/image values stemming from the conversion and no embedded or printer embedded color space, versus original jpegs with sRGB color space and its respective original image/color values in the jpeg.)
(outside of a bug)