Dan Margulis Applied Color Theory

Assign Profile, or No Color Management?

From: Michael Duskus
Date: Mon, May 8, 2006 1:50 am
Subject: Assign or No Color Management?
 
Hi All,

I work for an architecture firm where we receive images from various sources - photographers, scanned, digital files brought with new employees of previous projects, etc. These are all kept in an image database where most of them do not have an embedded profile.

We use these images regularly to place in InDesign for brochures, etc. I am attempting to write a standards manual on how to handle opening these images when they appear with both a Profile Mismatch, as well as without any profile embedded whatsoever.

Our working space is set up for Adobe RGB and SWOPv2. The policies are to Preserve Embedded.

My question is, since a majority of these images do not have a profile embedded (which I understand to be a bad thing), would it be safe for me to tell the others to Assign them the Current Working Space (Adobe RGB), or just ignore it/No Color Management?

Your thoughts?

Thanks in advance.

Michael Duskus
___________________________________________________________________________

From: Marco Ugolini
Date: Mon May 8, 2006 3:59 am
Subject: Re: [colortheory] Assign or No Color Management?

Hi Michael.

In my opinion, if time and budget allow, it may be best if a person with some understanding of color management screens the images before they are posted to the database, tries to determine the most appropriate profile for images without an embedded profile, embeds whichever profile is deemed appropriate, then saves the files and releases all images for internal use with specific instructions always to honor the embedded profile.

In essence, each and every image on the database should have an embedded profile, and the profile should be honored.

Also, all users should be set up with uniform studio-wide color policies for all Adobe applications, so that there are no discrepancies in the way the applications are working from one user to the next.

Last, but not least, all users should have calibrated and profiled displays.

That seems to me the only way to guarantee outcomes that, though they may end up different, at least start from pretty much the same place for all users.

Best regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
___________________________________________________________________________

From: Stephen Marsh
Mon May 8, 2006 4:15 am
Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Michael Duskus wrote:

I work for an architecture firm where we receive images from various
sources - photographers, scanned, digital files brought with new
employees of previous projects, etc. These are all kept in an image
database where most of them do not have an embedded profile.

Are these RGB, CMYK or a mixture of both? What about grayscale files?

We use these images regularly to place in InDesign for brochures, etc.

It is very important to know which version of ID you are using and what colour settings you are using etc.

I am attempting to write a standards manual on how to handle
opening these images when they appear with both a Profile Mismatch,
as well as without any profile embedded whatsoever.

So all images are opened up in Photoshop before being placed in ID?

Our working space is set up for Adobe RGB and SWOPv2. The policies
are to Preserve Embedded.

For both InDesign and Photoshop?

My question is, since a majority of these images do not have a
profile embedded (which I understand to be a bad thing), would it be
safe for me to tell the others to Assign them the Current Working
Space (Adobe RGB), or just ignore it/No Color Management?

Both do the same thing for RGB, as A98 will be assumed if no tag is in place, will it not?

It depends on how you wish to do things, there are many ways to go (placed tagged RGB but untagged CMYK, tagged RGB/CMYK, all tagged RGB or all as CMYK, tagged or untagged).

I think more info is required before I would even hazard a guess at various competing workflow options.

Best,

Stephen Marsh.
___________________________________________________________________________

From: Mark Segal
Mon May 8, 2006 9:16 am
Re: [colortheory] Assign or No Color Management?

Michael, there is no such thing as "No Color Management". The program must interpret the numbers in the image file in some manner. So "Off" is not a choice, even though it is (misleadingly) named in the program.

Marco's advice is solid best practice IF you are prepared to invest the time and resources in doing what he recommends.

Failing that, you do have options for handling "Missing Profile" and "Profile Mismatch" situations, and each does different things. Whether you want one or the other of those things in your workflow after making these choices determines what policies to make. I highly recommend that you have a read of Chapter 5, "Color Settings" in "Real World Adobe Photoshop CS2 by Bruce Fraser and David Blatner where they explain all the key implications systematically.

Mark Segal
___________________________________________________________________________

From: David Riecks
Mon May 8, 2006 9:33 am
Re: [colortheory] Assign or No Color Management?

Michael:

First thing I would recommend is that you should have someone with some CM skill and knowledge attempt to assign profiles to your "mystery meat" image. Second, I would recommend that you have all your suppliers (photographers and scan houses) read over the Universal Photographich Digital Imaging Guidelines at http://www.updig.org/ as this could help prevent this from remaining a problem in the future.

InDesign works much better with profiled images, but you will only get predictable results if you have the "right" profile.

David

----
David Riecks (that's "i" before "e", but the "e" is silent)
http://www.riecks.com , Chicago Midwest ASMP member
See the Universal Photographic Digital Imaging Guidelines at
http://www.updig.org
Chairman, SAA Imaging Technology Standards Committee
___________________________________________________________________________

From: John Robinson
Mon May 8, 2006 8:53 am
Re: architecture firm

I work for an architecture firm where we receive images from various
sources - photographers, scanned, digital files brought with new
employees of previous projects, etc. These are all kept in an image
database where most of them do not have an embedded profile.

Why would this firm hire someone to understand super complex color profiling? They design buildings. Just as long as the images look close to decent, they don't care if the profile matches or not. I would assign everything AdobeRGB1998/SWOPv2 for printed products and if the colors are off some on one job adjust all others to come in Photoshop CS2. Why make this so complex or elitist? They won't have color calibrated monitors throughout the design firm. Why should they? There is no payoff for understanding this complex process. Just get close enough and the client loves it. If the client wants pure color matched images, why would they go to an architecture firm for color images? If I were a photographer I would have to understand, but an architect firm? This color profiling and color matching is just too complex for a payoff anymore. With the proliferation of digital cameras there has been a dumbing down of acceptability. but it's just my two cents.

John Robinson
___________________________________________________________________________

From: Marco Ugolini
Mon May 8, 2006 12:23 pm
Re: [colortheory] Re: architecture firm

In a message dated May 8, 2006 5:53 AM, John Robinson wrote:

Why make this so complex or elitist? They won't have color calibrated
monitors throughout the design firm. Why should they? There is no payoff
for understanding this complex process.

Hi John.

I would leave it to the firm to determine how "complex" or "elitist" this would sound for their needs. I have worked close to people in the architecture business, and it's been my impression that many such people are acutely aware of issues affecting good-looking output. So, speaking for myself, I would *not* start off with a premise that architectural firms see such attempts at color control as "elitist". *You* may, they may not. Leave it to them to decide.

This color profiling and color matching is just too complex for a payoff
anymore. With the proliferation of digital cameras there has been a
dumbing down of acceptability. but it's just my two cents.

"Too complex for a payoff anymore"? It all depends on how "complex" one wishes to make it. There are degrees of precision possible in color-managed output. You can go very far or you can go only as far as you really need. Either way, a significant payoff is there for the taking, in terms of time and consumables, as well as job satisfaction.

As far as the "dumbing down" goes, that may be a reality in many areas, true, but it doesn't mean it ought to be encouraged, or that there are no longer any significant numbers of people out there who care about quality color output. That is simply not true. I am not quitting the business quite yet.

Best regards.

----
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
 ___________________________________________________________________________

From: Roger Howard
Mon May 8, 2006 5:11 pm
Re: architecture firm

Not only this -- while a comprehensive color management strategy and procedures may be somewhat complex (and yes, possibly irrelevant to many), merely deciding on and implementing simple policies for how to handle tagged and untagged files is neither complex nor elitist. It's straightforward and something anyone running an Adobe app should be at least nominally familiar with (and should be quite aware of their org's particular CM policy).

- Roger Howard
___________________________________________________________________________

From: Michael Duskus
Tue May 9, 2006 12:48 am
Re: [colortheory] Assign or No Color Management?

Hi All,

Thanks for all the responses. For the most part, unfortunately, it is true that Color Management isn't something that my firm wants to have to 'think' about too much. When I say my firm, I mean my Marketing Department. Since they are the ones who generally put together proposals, which requires them to use InDesign 2.0 and simply Placing images into their layouts without first opening and adjusting images in Photoshop (beyond their skill set and responsibilities), they need something that will be as near effortless as possible. This is why I am proposing to teach them to Assign the Adobe RGB profile if one is not present, and honor/preserve the profile if one is embedded.

With this one step (of either Assigning or Using Embedded), my thoughts are that we are likely to have more consistent results. Yes, all Adobe apps follow the same profile handling policies (preserve), and share the same workspace (A98 SWOPv2).

Again, unfortunately, calibrating the marketing department's monitors is not an option at this point - I'd be the first to suggest it and even offer to help (as I regularly calibrate my own in the Graphics Department), but there are 'higher ups' who will think this is a waste of time and not worth the effort. It will be fighting an uphill battle that I'm not prepared (nor capable) to handle. Likewise with having our person who handles the Image Database (at another office on a remote server) go through and embed profiles for each image. I do understand how that would help in an ideal set up. I really wish I could make that happen, but alas, can't.

So thanks for all of your great insight and advice, I think I'll proceed with simplifying this hurdle for the 'masses' by asking them to either Use the Embedded Profile, or Assign the Current Working Space Adobe RGB to any images opened as needed, and ensuring all Adobe applications share the same policies and work spaces.

Best,
Michael Duskus
___________________________________________________________________________

From:John Denniston
Tue May 9, 2006 1:31 am
Re: [colortheory] Assign or No Color Management?

Hi Michael,

Your question has me assuming a couple of things. One, that your pictures are rgb and that few have your working space embedded. Two, that your printing is done off site on a CMYK press. Three, that some of the people working for you need an automated process that doesn't allow them to make a decision.

That said I would assume that most of the profile mismatches are from sRGB, and the same, or at least something close to that, for those that are missing . Assigning AdobeRGB automatically or ignoring the situation is going to cause you problems. You could have it set up so that when the pictures without profiles are opened they are assigned sRGB and then converted to your working space - easy in PS not so sure if it is in ID as I'm still using PM.

If this is too complicated you might try changing your working space to sRGB, preserving embedded profiles while assigning sRGB if there is none embedded. The difference between sRGB and AdobeRGB on a four colour offset press is not going to be noticed by 99% of the people in this world and if there are some problems, they can be worked out with your printer.

Regards,
John Denniston
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Terry Wyse
    Date: Tue May 9, 2006 6:13am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Hi Michael,

While I don't disagree with your choice of working space profiles (RGB=A98, CMYK=SWOPv2), I would question the practice of blindly assigning A98RGB to untagged RGB images. While A98 is a GOOD RGB working space profile, it isn't the SAFEST profile to assume for untagged images. I would suggest sRGB for unknown/untagged images that you suspect came from digital cameras otherwise it would be safer to assume/assign ColorMatchRGB for untagged Mac images and sRGB for untagged PC/Windows images.

Despite the fact that you feel carefully assigning profiles to untagged images is beyond their skill set, I would suggest that once you have a decent calibrated/profiled display that the task isn't all that difficult. You can generally narrow down the LIKELY RGB working space choices to the three profiles mentioned above and have them quickly assign and preview each one to see which produces the "best" result and then have them move on. If this is too much for them, I would go so far as to suggest changing your default RGB working space to either sRGB or ColorMatchRGB. Either of these is a safer assumption than A98.

Regards,
Terry Wyse

_____________________________
WyseConsul
Color Management Consulting
G7 Certified Expert
704.843.0858
http://www.wyseconsul.com
http://www.colormanagementgroup.com
________________________________________________________________________

    From: Stephen Marsh
    Date: Tue May 9, 2006 6:16am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Michael Duskus wrote:

I mean my Marketing  
Department. Since they are the ones who generally put together  
proposals, which requires them to use InDesign 2.0 and simply Placing  
images into their layouts without first opening and adjusting images  
in Photoshop (beyond their skill set and responsibilities), they need  
something that will be as near effortless as possible. This is why I  
am proposing to teach them to Assign the Adobe RGB profile if one is  
not present, and honor/preserve the profile if one is embedded.

Michael, if they are just placing the images that they drag off a server and size them etc, then do they even know/care that there is a missing profile in the placed image?

Does not ID2 presume any untagged RGB as A98?

I would worry if you had tagged CMYK in any version below CS2 or if you did not have the safe CMYK policy in use in CS2 etc (usually one does not wish a conversion to take place).

But it also sounds as if somebody in this department is going to open them up in Photoshop.

With this one step (of either Assigning or Using Embedded), my  
thoughts are that we are likely to have more consistent results. Yes,  
all Adobe apps follow the same profile handling policies (preserve),  
and share the same workspace (A98 SWOPv2).

But will it be consistent quality or consistent crud? Why do you think that Adobe RGB is the best choice for mystery meat RGB, over say sRGB or ColorMatch RGB (then trying A98 and other space that are more beyond common monitor gamuts).

So thanks for all of your great insight and advice, I think I'll  
proceed with simplifying this hurdle for the 'masses' by asking them  
to either Use the Embedded Profile, or Assign the Current Working  
Space Adobe RGB to any images opened as needed, and ensuring all  
Adobe applications share the same policies and work spaces.

I presume that you have assigned common RGB profiles to many various sample images from the server and AdobeRGB provides the best description to these untagged images. Both onscreen and in print from ID using the standard workflow and devices as in a real job etc.  

If you had not, it would seem to be a bold move as in my experience this is not a common profile used to describe mystery RGB meat (but your butcher may use different ingredients to mine!).

Best,

Stephen Marsh.
________________________________________________________________________

    From: Stephen Marsh
    Date: Tue May 9, 2006 6:33am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Terry Wyse wrote:

Despite the fact that you feel carefully assigning profiles to  
untagged images is beyond their skill set, I would suggest that once  
you have a decent calibrated/profiled display that the task isn't all  
that difficult.

Agreed Terry and one can also use the info palette and or colour samplers set to LAB or your CMYK output to help evaluate things. Both visual and numbers are great, the way I see it is why limit yourself? But granted, this may be more than is expected of these users (evaluating LAB or CMYK colour numbers vs. what they see on the monitor).

You can generally narrow down the LIKELY RGB working  
space choices to the three profiles mentioned above and have them  
quickly assign and preview each one to see which produces the "best"  
result and then have them move on. If this is too much for them, I  
would go so far as to suggest changing your default RGB working space  
to either sRGB or ColorMatchRGB. Either of these is a safer  
assumption than A98.

I'm in complete agreement again. One can also put all this into a action as history states, even asign an action F-key for quick use or make it a batch or droplet etc.

members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/TagRoulette_APS5.zip
(Photoshop 5.x only)

members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/TagRoulette_APS6.zip
(Photoshop 6 or higher)

members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/TagRoulette_APS7.zip
(Photoshop 7 or later, also adding ProPhoto RGB to Apple, ColorMatch, sRGB, Adobe RGB)

Best,

Stephen Marsh.
________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Scott Griswold"
    Date: Tue May 9, 2006 7:43am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

HI Michael,

One important thing to consider here. Since you are not planning to calibrate the screens, that means that no user has any business messing with color based on the screen. They will need to go strictly by the numbers or leave the colors alone and just pass the data through the system untouched.

In that case, set your CM prefs to always preserve embedded profiles and for images without profiles leave it "off" meaning do not tag it with a profile. Make no assumptions about the data. And never make adjustments to that file based on what you visually see on the screen, no matter how bad it looks.  It really does not matter what default profile Photoshop uses to store and display that image temporarily, as long as that does not get tagged to it. Making a guess about what profile to tag can be dangerous if you are not already working in a calibrated environment and have a calibrated proofer to validate your decision. You are best off leaving the data alone and not tagging the image.

You do however have to ask yourself, who is ultimately responsible for the color on the final product. If you are getting your files from a known source and they are supplying proofs for your approval, then you should leave the data alone. If your firm/department is responsible for delivering the color to a printer and delivering it accurately and you are in some cases the source (i.e.   scanning or digital photo capture) then I hate to say it, but your department has the responsibility of learning color management. Unless you put someone in the middle who is color savvy or unless you pass that data to the printing company and get proofs back from them for approval then they will expect you to deliver the color in a print ready fashion.

  If there are any changes needed to those proofs because a color is not what you expected (Expectations are 99% of the reason for color management) then you still need someone inside your firm to make that correction or at least be able to dictate back to the printer what you desire.

Bottom line is that the color accuracy has to start somewhere and with a digital image that is usually with the person involved with the source of that image. The responsibility lies with them to provide a proof that will fit into your workflow. But if you do not have a definition for what that workflow is, they will only be able to guess at what you want.

Think of it this way. You have 4 people in a line and want to convey a message from one end to the other. All 4 of those people speak different languages. How is that message going to make it from one end to the other? It's not.

However, if you had people in the middle who understood all languages, the message would be able to move from one end to the other regardless of the language the message started in. The language here being the color profile. Translation from one end to the other will only be as good as the accuracy of those translating in the middle. So if you are in the middle of the process, it will always be helpful for you to understand color management so that the sources for your images can talk through you and you can properly convey the requirements to the printer.

If however you know that at the end of the process you have someone who speaks all languages (understands color management and profiles),you can pass the message (image) along as it originally came to you.  

No need to understand it along the way, just pass it through unchanged.

Scott Griswold

P.S. I have to agree with another poster that sRGB would be a better   "assumption" to make for untagged RGB images and for a general all purpose colorspace if you are not aware of the source.
________________________________________________________________________
 
    From: "Howard Smith
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 2:11am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Michael,

While I'm not nearly as qualified as most of those who have offered expert advice, please let me offer a comment or two that may help with your problem.

(1) Digital cameras (so far as I know) use sRGB for their raw images, leaving it to the photographer to decide what to do with them.

(2) Unless directed to do otherwise, the several service bureaus who have done any work for me all produced digital files that were in the sRGB format.  Amateur photographers, using digital cameras, do the same because they don't know any better.  If they have their images scanned by a service bureau they're most likely going to get sRGB unless they specify otherwise.

(2) Ir'a unlikely that anyone who gives you an untagged image will have known enough to have done anything at all with it, making it almost certain that the image is in sRGB format. Whether the aforementioned service bureaus knew anything about what they were doing is debatable, considering the spotty quality of the work they provided.

Now, considering points 1, 2, and 3 above, it's most likely that your untagged images are in sRGB format.

(4) Evidently you haven't experienced any serious problems so far, leading me to suspect that the great majority of your customers are satisfied with the images they are getting even though the originals may have been through more than one profile change.  If you assign different RGB profiles to several duplicates of the same image and then convert all of them to CMYK, your final images are all going to be close enough in appearance that non-experts would have to see all of them side-by-side to know that there was any difference.  Granted that the differences in at least one common channel will be obvious, the final user will never see those channels.
 
Considering all four points plus the fact that you obviously want some kind of standardization, my own feeling--for what it's worth--is that you are unlikely to experience any signifcant problems by just making sure that all RGB images are in sRGB format and that all CMYK images are SWOP V.2.  If you were doing work where the final output was absolutely critical--e.g., brochures for a fine-art museum--then you might have to worry.  As it is, most people who see your images are neither going to know nor to care how close they match the original subject matter as long as the overall effect is pleasing.

Summing it up, I would suggest that you go with your feelings and standardize in a way that makes you comfortable.  If it doesn't work, you'll know soon enough.  If it does, you'll be considered some kind of genius. While the expert opinions given earlier are far more valid than my own, I would still approach the problem from what is acceptable to your customers instead of worrying about what is technically superior.  But then that'w why I considered myself a maverick in scientific research.  That which worked and that which was the correct approach were not always the same.

Howard Smith
________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 2:13am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

In a message dated 5/8/06 9:48 PM, Michael Duskus wrote:

Thanks for all the responses. For the most part, unfortunately, it is
true that Color Management isn't something that my firm wants to have
to 'think' about too much. When I say my firm, I mean my Marketing
Department. Since they are the ones who generally put together
proposals, which requires them to use InDesign 2.0 and simply Placing
images into their layouts without first opening and adjusting images
in Photoshop (beyond their skill set and responsibilities), they need
something that will be as near effortless as possible. This is why I
am proposing to teach them to Assign the Adobe RGB profile if one is
not present, and honor/preserve the profile if one is embedded.

Hi again, Michael.

Forgive my bluntness, but, simply put, that is not a good idea. And not because AdobeRGB per se is not a good color space. Or sRGB, or ColorMatch RGB, or what-have-you. That is not the point.

The point is that a choice of color space of the kind that you describe in your scenario would be *arbitrary*, that is, done without reasoned consideration of the variables at play. Choosing AdobeRGB in this manner would be as good as choosing sRGB or any other color space at random. Which means that it could be the right choice or not, just like shooting craps.

The more sensible way to go about this, in my opinion, is to open the untagged images on a computer that has a calibrated and profiled monitor, and evaluate what the effects are of assigning a few RGB possible color spaces (the usual suspects), and deciding which seems to provide the best appearance, after which you proceed to embed that one.

Otherwise, choosing AdobeRGB in all cases may end up trashing the color in the file, which one then attempts to remedy with curves, levels, etc.; and that gets even worse if one is using a non-profiled display, which would make the user twice blind (once for starting out wrong, twice for proceeding on the wrong path without a guide).

With this one step (of either Assigning or Using Embedded), my
thoughts are that we are likely to have more consistent results.

True, but that means that it may be consistently *bad* too.

Yes, all Adobe apps follow the same profile handling policies (preserve),
and share the same workspace (A98 SWOPv2).

Not by default. The defaults in Photoshop are the North America General Purpose Defaults, which means sRGB and US Web Coated (SWOP) v2, plus Preserve Embedded Profiles color policies for RGB, but Off for CMYK, and no warnings for mismatches or missing profiles.

So, you cannot count on Adobe's default color policies if you want to be sure that every user follows the guidelines that you are listing.

Again, unfortunately, calibrating the marketing department's monitors
is not an option at this point

So, this whole exercise is pointless? No way to ensure the proper user defaults. No way to ensure that users will follow or understand proper procedures. No way to have accurate color on the displays. What is being achieved here?

I'd be the first to suggest it and
even offer to help (as I regularly calibrate my own in the Graphics
Department), but there are 'higher ups' who will think this is a
waste of time and not worth the effort.

Yeah, the resident color experts have spoken...

Personally, I have a rule of thumb: do not care about something more than your client does. They will think that you are being condescending, and resent you. And it's a waste of everybody's time, specially if they are not asking to be "educated," or don't express any sincere interest. If they don't care, you should let it go.

It will be fighting an uphill
battle that I'm not prepared (nor capable) to handle. Likewise with
having our person who handles the Image Database (at another office
on a remote server) go through and embed profiles for each image. I
do understand how that would help in an ideal set up. I really wish I
could make that happen, but alas, can't.

Well, lots of luck, then, because you will need it...

Regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Maris V. Lidaka Sr."
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 9:07am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

You can do this quicky running Stephen Marsh's "Tag Roulette" action - it "automatically assigns each of the four standard RGB working spaces to a RGB file as history states (Apple RGB, ColorMatch RGB, sRGB and Adobe RGB 1998). The Photoshop 7 action adds ProPhoto RGB. For use in the aid of identifying untagged RGB working space images."

I just stumbled upon it yesterday.

http://members.ozemail.com.au/~binaryfx/ - click "Free Downloads"

Maris V. Lidaka Sr.
________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Michael J Duskus"
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 10:10am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Marco, Howard, et al.
 
You've made some great points - thank you. Particularly, it really hit home with your personal 'rule of thumb' on if the client doesn't care as much, nor should I. It's highly applicable in this scenario. So thanks again!
 
On the color settings note: I have manually set the working spaces for all (needed) computers to use the A98 & SWOP v2 working spaces.
 
Well, as I now have a few more days to rethink this (meeting pushed back). What would you (and others, please) advise in my situation? I'm now leaning towards leaving the myster meat as is - choosing Don't Color Manage for images that do not have an embedded profile.
 
My reasons are:
1. No one's monitor will be calibrated / profiled (if I'm 'lucky' my Graphics team will - besides myself).
2. I don't want to ruin any images
3. Well, it just may not be worth the effort to try to get people to understand why it's important (but they'll still complain)
 
Anyways, you guys are very helpful and I truly appreciate your insights and advice!
 
Michael Duskus
________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 10:16am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

In a message dated May 10, 2006 6:34 AM, Maris V. Lidaka Sr. wrote:

You can do this quicky running Stephen Marsh's "Tag Roulette" action - it
"automatically assigns each of the four standard RGB working spaces to a RGB
file as history states (Apple RGB, ColorMatch RGB, sRGB and Adobe RGB 1998).
The Photoshop 7 action adds ProPhoto RGB. For use in the aid of identifying
untagged RGB working space images."

Hi Maris.

Thank you for telling me and us about this.

And thank you too, Stephen Marsh, of course, for coming up with the action. It's a smart and elegant idea.

Regards.

-----
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
________________________________________________________________________
 
    From: "Maris V. Lidaka Sr."
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 11:19am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

I would assign sRGB to all untagged images, then convert to AdobeRGB98

Maris V. Lidaka Sr.
________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Bob Frost"
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 0:59pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Howard,

(1) Digital cameras (so far as I know) use sRGB for their raw images,
leaving it to the photographer to decide what to do with them.
 
Not true. My Nikon cameras give my the choice of outputting raw files in  sRGB or Adobe98, and if process them in Photoshop's ACR I can output them in  four colorspaces, including Dan's 'favourite' - ProPhotoRGB!

I think this applies to many cameras.

Bob Frost
________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Peter Figen"
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 4:30pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Raw digital camera file actually have no color space assigned or associated with them in the camera. When you open a raw file in the raw converter of your choice, you will usually choose a camera profile based on the make and model of your camera. There may be more than one available profile, one for daylight and another for tungsten, etc. It's only when you actually process the file that you get to choose the destination color space, which is usually one of the Adobe working spaces, but depending on your  software (C1 here),  
may be any profile available on your system.

Peter Figen
________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Ron Kelly"
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 6:49pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

I believe that Howard may be able to provide some insight here.

Many professional cameras DO allow for options, but that does not mean that they aren't shooting sRGB because they can do that, too.

Other, which some may call "amateur", digital cameras may or may not allow for RAW capture or in-camera jpegs that are other than sRGB.

So which is it, Howard? Are the files you're using from professional equipment and users who prefer other than sRGB? I'm guessing based on what you've already said that the answer to that question is "no." Therefore sRGB would be the best bet.

Notice that I'm not suggesting one colorspace is better than another;   I'm offering an opinion on what is likely the colorspace of an unknown file.  

Cheers,
Ron Kelly
________________________________________________________________________
 
    From: "Rick Gordon"
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 7:39pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Another consideration on the "which RGB color space to assign by default" is the following (often touted by Dan, so I won't take credit):

The question is "what happens when you're wrong":

If a sRGB-optimized document is assigned an Adobe RGB profile, the result will be very undersaturated -- washed out. If an Adobe RGB-optimized document is assigned an sRGB profile, the result will be possibly somewhat oversaturated. Particularly if the file is then separated to CMYK at some point downstream, the results form the second choice are likely to be superior.
--
 
___________________________________________________

RICK GORDON
EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING
___________________________________________________

WWW:   http://www.shelterpub.com
________________________________________________________________________

    From: Howard Smith
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 7:41pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Thanks, Bob!  I really wasn't sure about my statement, but felt certain that someone would supply a valid answer.  Some folks are reluctant to ask or answer questions here for fear of being shown to be wrong.  Heck, it's a great way to learn new things.  Sometimes painful, but effective and appreciated.

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Rick Gordon
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 7:53pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Forget what I said, I was writing on an empty stomach. What I meant was:

If, at the point of CMYK conversion, the assumption is that an RGB document is sRGB, a document which is more accurately Adobe RGB will be assigned a profile of sRGB by default before conversion, leading to an undersaturated result.

If, at the point of CMYK conversion, the assumption is that an RGB document is Adobe RGB, a document which is more accurately sRGB will be assigned a profile of Adobe RGB by default before conversion, leading to an highly saturated result.

Because there is a good chance that saturation will be lost in the process of CMYK conversion, particularly if it was converted with a perceptual intent, the second mistake will probably produce a superior result to the first mistake.

Rick Gordon
___________________________________________________

RICK GORDON
EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING
___________________________________________________

WWW:   http://www.shelterpub.com
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Howard Smith
    Date: Wed May 10, 2006 8:50pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

My sincere thanks both to Peter Figen and to Ron Kelly for furthering my education.  Man!  The number of things still to be learned appear to be almost infinite.  

As for the question about the color spaces in files given to me, those that come from service bureaus have been exclusively sRGB.  When doing my own photography, using an 8 megapixel Olympus, I've never bothered with working on raw files.  Taking the aasy way out I just download the JPEG images, convert them to Adobe RGB and start correcting.  (Thanks to Dan, I also correct in LAB, CMYK, or all three.)  Sounds a little wild, and not something I would recommend to others, but it gets the job done.  I can make some 30 x 40 enlargements with impressive detail, using Epson wide format printers.  But most of my images are more on the order of 16 x 20.  Some contain subtle shifts of pastel colors while other contain details involving collages of gold foil and other impossible colors.  Some are images of bold, abstract paintings, others of paintings of wildlife with incredibly delicately detailed birds and flowers.  Don't know how this detail can come through from JPEG images that may go through some unorthodox manipulations in Photoshop, but you can count the tiny feathers on the birds in the final images and I'm not going to question the why.  I will say that had it not been for the generosity of contributors to this forum, much of this would have been impossible to correct.  Even so, an occasional image still sends me climbing the walls, but I'm too bullheaded to admit defeat.

Speaking of unorthodox. I used to be able to make some near-photographic prints from 72 ppi images taken off the Web, but my wife caught me and I can't do that anymore.  So what's different about that other than the fact that they resembled original photographs?  Even though it's not considered good form, I just increased the resolution to the maximum practical, did a little blending and sharpening, and they came out really well even when they were near life-size prints.  Just because something shouldn't be done doesn't mean it can't be done.  It just means that we may not know how yet.

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Francis Corvin"
    Date: Thu May 11, 2006 3:47am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

My reasons are:
1. No one's monitor will be calibrated / profiled (if I'm 'lucky' my
Graphics team will - besides myself).
2. I don't want to ruin any images
3. Well, it just may not be worth the effort to try to get people to
understand why it's important (but they'll still complain)

There is an additional reason.

You didn't say whether the original image would be kept as is, or  whether it would be assigned a profile when first used (and thence  always keep that profile). I understood the latter, i.e., when your  colleagues open an image that doesn't have a profile, they'll assign  one and overwrite the original.

If you let this happen without documenting the change (and we all  know this is not going to happen without a large number of errors and  omissions), you won't know when you see an image with an embedded  profile in a year's time, whether it was one of those arbitrary  conversions or whether the profile was actually authentic.

Would questioning the profile of every your image be worse than  having a few images without profile? Undoubtedly to me.

Regards,

Francis Corvin
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Les De Moss"
    Date: Thu May 11, 2006 6:40am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

It seems to me that given the circumstances of your workflow, at least ONE person needs to be in charge of image acquisition, analysis and profiling on ONE calibrated monitor.

From that point forward, subsequent workstations should be configured consistently regarding color management, as you have suggested. As for the tight-fisted higher up in your organization, the requirements are fairly reasonable... a decent graphics card and monitor with individual controls for color temp and RGB adjustments, and $250 (or less) for Spyder or Eye One monitor calibration hardware.

Les De Moss
DigiGraphics LLC
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Les De Moss"
    Date: Thu May 11, 2006 6:56am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

One more thought... if the all of the output is destined for a CMYK device (4-ink Inkjet, offset, or color laser) then a conversion into CMYK (and back into RGB if inkjet or laser) somewhere along the way is necessary to confine the color gamut to the smaller spaces these devices are capable of reproducing.

If however, final output is substantially to photographic material (print or film), all photographic imaging devices -that I am aware of- image from RGB files, and most of those use sRGB as their color space.

Les De Moss
DigiGraphics LLC
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 4:42am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

In a message dated 5/9/06 9:04 PM, Howard Smith wrote:

If you assign different RGB profiles to
several duplicates of the same image and then convert all of them to CMYK,
your final images are all going to be close enough in appearance that
non-experts would have to see all of them side-by-side to know that there
was any difference.

Hi Howard.

I do beg to differ. Assigning a few RGB color spaces to an image (e.g, AdobeRGB, sRGB, ColorMatch RGB, ProPhotoRGB) will cause marked shifts in the image's appearance, and those will be reflected in the results one gets converting each appearance to a given "flavor" of CMYK (say, US Web Coated SWOP v2, for example).

Maybe you meant to say something else?

Considering all four points plus the fact that you obviously want some kind
of standardization, my own feeling--for what it's worth--is that you are
unlikely to experience any signifcant problems by just making sure that all
RGB images are in sRGB format and that all CMYK images are SWOP V.2.

It all depends on what one would consider "significant", I guess.

Best regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 4:44am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

 Hi Rick.

The effect of assigning AdobeRGB to an image whose proper appearance is represented by the sRGB color space is to *increase* the *apparent* saturation of the image, since the color numbers within the image will be seen as representing areas of color further toward the outer edges of saturation in the larger-gamut AdobeRGB space.

Of course, the opposite (less apparent saturation) happens in the reverse scenario (assigning sRGB to an image meant for AdobeRGB).

Best regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 4:44am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

In a message dated 5/10/06 9:58 AM, Michael J Duskus wrote:
 
What would you (and others, please) advise in my situation? I'm now leaning
towards leaving the myster meat as is - choosing Don't Color Manage for images
that do not have an embedded profile.

Hi Michael.

Choosing "Don't Color Manage" is not a solutin. Whether you choose that option or not, Photoshop still *does* color manage each and every image: if the image has no embedded profile, the application will assign to it the profile that has been set as default in the Color Settings.

So, when you choose "Don't Color Manage", the appearance of your image is still being interpreted through Photoshop's default profile (i.e., whichever default profile has been set in your copy of the application).

My reasons are:
1. No one's monitor will be calibrated / profiled (if I'm 'lucky' my Graphics
team will - besides myself).

Other people's monitors may not be calibrated, but if quality results are expected, then there will still be some proofing stage required before images are released for final output. Which means that someone will have to decide how to prepare these images for final delivery. That is, unless the images are not slated for printing or any other exacting task.

2. I don't want to ruin any images

You may anyway, specially if you or someone else work with an uncalibrated display, and, moreover, if you chance your results on whatever default profiles are being used in a given copy of Photoshop.

3. Well, it just may not be worth the effort to try to get people to
understand why it's important (but they'll still complain)

Well, you could use color management on the sly anyway, without telling your superiors (perhaps conspire a bit with the people in the technology department), and take this opportunity to expand your skills and make yourself more valuable. And let your bosses wonder how it happened that you
became so good all of a sudden. ;-)

Display calibration hardware and software are so within reach these days, that it's no longer defensible not to use them.

Best regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 4:50am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

In a message dated 5/10/06 10:27 AM, Maris V. Lidaka Sr. wrote:

I would assign sRGB to all untagged images, then convert to AdobeRGB98

Hi Maris.

I don't think that there is a magic formula here. What you are suggesting is still arbitrary.

Best regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Maris V. Lidaka Sr."
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 9:08am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

I know - I was not suggesting it as a 'magic formula' - I was only suggesting it as a better alternative to automatically assigning AdobeRGB98 to all untagged images, based on the message poster's indication that that was what he was going to do.

I still think the best course is what you suggested in an earlier post - assign different color spaces to the untagged images, on a calibrated monitor, and select the one that appears most accurate.  With Stephen Marsh's Tag Roulette action, it's a 5-10 second procedure.

Maris V. Lidaka Sr.
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Jim Chamberlain"
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 3:13pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

As a side note, my approach is to save the both the profiled file and  the original file with a descriptive suffix for clarity.  When in  trouble, the original is handy.  
ie:
ElCapitan.psd
ElCapitan_Crop_LexJetSatin.psd
The file system keeps the files together and drive space is cheap.
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Marco Ugolini
    Date: Fri May 12, 2006 10:37pm(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Hi Jim.

Please don't take offense, but this procedure you are describing is futile. As long as all you are doing is *assigning* a profile, and you are not converting to a target color space, the original image file is very much still handy. Strip the attached profile, and your original untagged image file is still there, exactly the same as the original. No need to save it separately.

I do not question the usefulness of assigning a profile to an image before handing it out to someone else, for example, but to save several copies of a file with the only difference being the profile assigned to each, is a procedure of highly dubious usefulness, and more likely wasteful.

Granted, storage is cheap, but it is highly redundant to save two or more version of what is *exactly the same image* -- i.e., the same exact color *numbers*, since there is no conversion involved here. Assigning a profile to untagged images, or to images that are already tagged with another profile, is a simple and non-destructive procedure that can be done quickly at any time *if and when needed* -- e.g., at print time.

And think of all the other things you could use all that disk space for! Like, more images, for example -- or lots of music! : -)

Regards.

--------------
Marco Ugolini
Mill Valley, CA
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: Howard Smith
    Date: Sun May 14, 2006 9:38am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Marco,

Thank you for your friendly and informative correction to my comments.  I can't argue with the technical validity of what you said.  My solutions are based on what I personally consider significant, which brings up a point that should be made about all of my comments.  My approach to problem solving involving color corrections is to look for solutions that solve my own problems--to my own satisfaction. Members of this forum should proceed with caution when following some of my comments and suggestions because while these are things that have worked for me, at the same time they may not be suitable for other users.  Best to use them as a starting point in exploring new ways of doing things rather than as a final answer.  My comment made in a recent post about making life-size enlargements from lo-res images, for example, should not be taken to mean that such an approach incorporates some kind of magic.  In my case it's a matter of trying to fool the eye rather than trying to achieve the impossible.  In this example, increasing the resolution cannot add any detail that does not exist in the beginning, but it does smooth out the obvious distractions such as the "jaggies".  By then using blurring, blending, sharpening, etc. it is possible to at least encourage the viewer to believe that the enlarged image has more detail when in fact nothing has been added.  Somewhat like unsharp masking, it doesn't really add detail to the image, it just makes the viewer think that it has.

This Forum has got to be the greatest educational tool since Photoshop books first appeared in print!

Howard Smith
___________________________________________________________________________

    From: "Bob Frost"
    Date: Mon May 15, 2006 3:56am(PDT)
Subject: Re: Assign or No Color Management?

Peter,

Raw digital camera file actually have no color space assigned or
associated with them in the camera.

Mmmm! My Nikon cameras (D2x, D200, D70) all have the option of taking images  in sRGB or AdobeRGB spaces. Obviously if you are taking jpgs, this  conversion is done in camera, but AFAIK my raw files are also 'tagged' with  that choice of color space. This is recorded in the dcf/exif data I believe  and in the filename (leading _ or not), and I assume the large and small jpg  previews that are stored in the raw file are also converted to the chosen  color space in camera or they wouldn't display correctly.

So when I open my raw files in Nikon Capture, it uses that chosen color  space to display the files by default, either using the previews in the  files or reprocessing the files. I don't have to choose it again. I can of  course change my mind and choose another color space for Capture to use and  resave the file with that default space, but as far as I can see my camera  setting choice is recorded in the raw file for intelligent programs to see.

Agree?

Bob Frost