Color management in Windows

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

nope. what matters are the capabilities and quality of the product
itself, as well as the tools used to do the calibration/profiling.

The matter is further complicated for printing in that the calibration
is dependent on the ink system and the media. The ink system doesn't
usually change much (except in the case of black inks for the Epson
P800) but the media is widely variable.

all you need is a printer profile for the printer/paper/ink combo
you're using. ideally, it's custom done for each batch of ink and
paper, but the standard epson profiles are good enough for all but the
most precise demands.

For my tests I have been using the correct Epson inks (as I always do)
and Epson Premium Glossy paper which I believe gives the widest gamut.

that should work quite well.

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 18:45:37 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

nope. what matters are the capabilities and quality of the product
itself, as well as the tools used to do the calibration/profiling.

The matter is further complicated for printing in that the calibration
is dependent on the ink system and the media. The ink system doesn't
usually change much (except in the case of black inks for the Epson
P800) but the media is widely variable.

all you need is a printer profile for the printer/paper/ink combo
you're using. ideally, it's custom done for each batch of ink and
paper, but the standard epson profiles are good enough for all but the
most precise demands.

But then you have the choice of color management by Photo Shop or by
the printer. Then, for a start, printer settings include EPSON
Standard sRGB, Adobe RGB, Photo enhance, ICM, and OFF. For all of
these (except OFF) there are further advanced settings which enable
color adjustments.

For my tests I have been using the correct Epson inks (as I always do)
and Epson Premium Glossy paper which I believe gives the widest gamut.

that should work quite well.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2/18/2017 6:35 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:
On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 15:31:56 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Neil
wrote:

The way I see things the issue lies with Windows.

Under Windows, color management capabilities are still device-dependent,
and rely on the firmware and drivers supplied by the hardware
manufacturers.

that's just asking for problems.

For example, all monitors are not created equally, nor
are printers (one reason for the wide price range for these items).

nobody said they were.

Skilled professionals can easily see performance differences between
different models and makes.

one need not be a skilled professional to see differences.

How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

nope. what matters are the capabilities and quality of the product
itself, as well as the tools used to do the calibration/profiling.

The matter is further complicated for printing in that the calibration
is dependent on the ink system and the media. The ink system doesn't
usually change much (except in the case of black inks for the Epson
P800) but the media is widely variable.

For my tests I have been using the correct Epson inks (as I always do)
and Epson Premium Glossy paper which I believe gives the widest gamut.


Do you also use the proper profiles?

--
PeterN

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

nope. what matters are the capabilities and quality of the product
itself, as well as the tools used to do the calibration/profiling.

The matter is further complicated for printing in that the calibration
is dependent on the ink system and the media. The ink system doesn't
usually change much (except in the case of black inks for the Epson
P800) but the media is widely variable.

all you need is a printer profile for the printer/paper/ink combo
you're using. ideally, it's custom done for each batch of ink and
paper, but the standard epson profiles are good enough for all but the
most precise demands.

But then you have the choice of color management by Photo Shop or by
the printer.

yep. choose one or the other. don't choose both (or neither), a mistake
that happens more often than one might think.

Then, for a start, printer settings include EPSON
Standard sRGB, Adobe RGB, Photo enhance, ICM, and OFF. For all of
these (except OFF) there are further advanced settings which enable
color adjustments.

see above. if you choose photoshop, set the printer's management to
off. otherwise, use icm.

On 2/18/2017 3:39 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-02-18 19:49:19 +0000, Neil said:

On 2/18/2017 12:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-02-18 15:54:39 +0000, nospam said:
In article , Neil
wrote:


http://www.ohio.edu/people/schneidw/2400/ps_cms.pdf makes an
interesting statement:

"In Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0, color management does not occur
at the system level, but at the application level using CMSs such
as Kodak KCMS and Agfa¹s FotoTune. In Windows 98 and Windows NT
5.0, Microsoft intends to use ICM 2.0, which was developed by
Microsoft and uses the same Linotype-Hell CMM as ColorSync 2.0"

So these days does color management occur at the system level or the
application level or is the author of an application able to
choose? I
have carried out a number of tests with both print and screen that
suggests that several color management channels are available and
they
all give quite different results.

I think it is a good idea to differentiate between professional users
and others.

what for?

For professional users, color management under Windows was
always an application-level process. However, to be clear,
"application"
includes system-level hardware, such as video cards, calibration
equipment, monitors, printers, etc. Professional users integrate
all of
these items into a system.

macs and ios devices have colour management done at the system level.
*everything* is colour managed, including icons drawn on the desktop.

Don't muddy the water too much.
After all this seems to be a Windows specific issue, and Eric is not
about to go out and buy a Mac.

For consumers, OS-level color management is an improvement over
previous
capability, but is less than professional quality with fewer options.

nonsense. the quality is identical, regardless of the type of user. the
computer doesn't know whether the person sitting in front of it is a
pro or a newbie, nor does it care.

That much is true. However, if there are output inconsistencies it helps
to have a solution, and Eric has output inconsistencies.
Personnally I use a color managed system starting with a calibrated
display set to the Pantone calibration, wide gamut workspace(ProPhoto
RGB or Adobe RGB 1998) for processing and editing, matched icc
paper/printer profiles for printing and sRGB for online display or
sharing.

I know that Eric calibrates his displays, but there seems to be an issue
with Windows 10 not letting him use the wide gamut available to his new
display and a similar colorspace dissociation between Windows and his
printer, an "R" series Epson which is not exactly an amateur hour
printer.
At this stage I have no idea what colorspace Eric is using for
processing or editing, since he is using LR CC + PS CC, I assume he is
using ProPhoto RGB or Adobe RGB (1998), or should be. So with the
discontinuity between Windows-display-processing-output, the result is
inconsistant print results.
The way I see things the issue lies with Windows.

Under Windows, color management capabilities are still
device-dependent, and rely on the firmware and drivers supplied by the
hardware manufacturers.

Yet Eric still has issues with W10, and some discontinuity he is unable
to fix.

Yet I have not had such issues with Win10, I embed the correct profile
for Costco, and let the printer manage the color.





For example, all monitors are not created equally, nor are printers
(one reason for the wide price range for these items).

...and he has, what I understand to be a reasonablely high performance
display capable of accomodating a 100% Adobe RGB gamut.

He also had an Epson R3880 and replaced it with a P800 which is a not
inexpensive ($1295) 8 color, pro level printer. Add to that, his image
files are coming out of a Nikon D750 with processing done from NEF with
Adobe LR + PS CC. He doesn't exactly have an amateur hour processing set
up.

Skilled professionals can easily see performance differences between
different models and makes. How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

I believe that Eric has as much experience, skill, including calibration
capability, and equipment as many pros. What he has is a disparity issue
which he has not been able to fully identify, along with a solution or
advice from any of us which might provide that fix.
Saying that "professionals can easily see performance differences" is
little help, especially when skilled amateurs see the same performance
differences. What he needs is an effective answer, which so far is not
forthcoming from any of us.



I have advised Eric to contact Epson support.

--
PeterN

On 2/18/2017 6:08 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:


http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Organizing_and_Optimizing_Photos.html


Actually I have been using
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2_ProPhoto.tif
which I obtained from the Steinmuller & Jurgens web site. I have also
used a number of test prints of my own contriving including
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0Composite.jpg
which was constructed with an Adobe RGB color space.

I've carried out quite a number of print trials and the results have
got me puzzled.

My original post arose from my attempts to find out what really is
going on.



One of my friends was having issues with printing. He did a lot of
research, and took tons of notes. He decided to publish his notes, which
are available for sale on his website.
http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Organizing_and_Optimizing_Photos.html

BTW his website contains a lot of links, and some really neat images.
http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Homepage.html



--
PeterN

On 2017-02-19 02:41:25 +0000, PeterN
said:

On 2/18/2017 3:39 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-02-18 19:49:19 +0000, Neil said:

On 2/18/2017 12:02 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2017-02-18 15:54:39 +0000, nospam said:
In article , Neil
wrote:


http://www.ohio.edu/people/schneidw/2400/ps_cms.pdf makes an
interesting statement:

"In Windows 95 and Windows NT 4.0, color management does not occur
at the system level, but at the application level using CMSs such
as Kodak KCMS and Agfa¹s FotoTune. In Windows 98 and Windows NT
5.0, Microsoft intends to use ICM 2.0, which was developed by
Microsoft and uses the same Linotype-Hell CMM as ColorSync 2.0"

So these days does color management occur at the system level or the
application level or is the author of an application able to
choose? I
have carried out a number of tests with both print and screen that
suggests that several color management channels are available and
they
all give quite different results.

I think it is a good idea to differentiate between professional users
and others.

what for?

For professional users, color management under Windows was
always an application-level process. However, to be clear,
"application"
includes system-level hardware, such as video cards, calibration
equipment, monitors, printers, etc. Professional users integrate
all of
these items into a system.

macs and ios devices have colour management done at the system level.
*everything* is colour managed, including icons drawn on the desktop.

Don't muddy the water too much.
After all this seems to be a Windows specific issue, and Eric is not
about to go out and buy a Mac.

For consumers, OS-level color management is an improvement over
previous
capability, but is less than professional quality with fewer options.

nonsense. the quality is identical, regardless of the type of user. the
computer doesn't know whether the person sitting in front of it is a
pro or a newbie, nor does it care.

That much is true. However, if there are output inconsistencies it helps
to have a solution, and Eric has output inconsistencies.
Personnally I use a color managed system starting with a calibrated
display set to the Pantone calibration, wide gamut workspace(ProPhoto
RGB or Adobe RGB 1998) for processing and editing, matched icc
paper/printer profiles for printing and sRGB for online display or
sharing.

I know that Eric calibrates his displays, but there seems to be an issue
with Windows 10 not letting him use the wide gamut available to his new
display and a similar colorspace dissociation between Windows and his
printer, an "R" series Epson which is not exactly an amateur hour
printer.
At this stage I have no idea what colorspace Eric is using for
processing or editing, since he is using LR CC + PS CC, I assume he is
using ProPhoto RGB or Adobe RGB (1998), or should be. So with the
discontinuity between Windows-display-processing-output, the result is
inconsistant print results.
The way I see things the issue lies with Windows.

Under Windows, color management capabilities are still
device-dependent, and rely on the firmware and drivers supplied by the
hardware manufacturers.

Yet Eric still has issues with W10, and some discontinuity he is unable
to fix.

Yet I have not had such issues with Win10, I embed the correct profile
for Costco, and let the printer manage the color.

Your computer running W10 is not going to have any effect on print jobs
executed by Costco. This issue relates to prints made on Eric's home
set up with his printer.

For example, all monitors are not created equally, nor are printers
(one reason for the wide price range for these items).

...and he has, what I understand to be a reasonablely high performance
display capable of accomodating a 100% Adobe RGB gamut.

He also had an Epson R3880 and replaced it with a P800 which is a not
inexpensive ($1295) 8 color, pro level printer. Add to that, his image
files are coming out of a Nikon D750 with processing done from NEF with
Adobe LR + PS CC. He doesn't exactly have an amateur hour processing set
up.

Skilled professionals can easily see performance differences between
different models and makes. How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

I believe that Eric has as much experience, skill, including calibration
capability, and equipment as many pros. What he has is a disparity issue
which he has not been able to fully identify, along with a solution or
advice from any of us which might provide that fix.
Saying that "professionals can easily see performance differences" is
little help, especially when skilled amateurs see the same performance
differences. What he needs is an effective answer, which so far is not
forthcoming from any of us.

I have advised Eric to contact Epson support.

I don't believe that Epson is the problem. I am begining to think he
has a printer driver and software print dialog conflict over control of
the print job. Either that or something I don't understad regarding W10
and his display.

All my LR and PS adjustments and edits are made using ProPhoto RGB,
unless I get a JPEG from another source and I am playing with it. Then
I will work in sRGB.

For my print jobs at home I have the software (either Photoshop or
Lightroom) manage color.
That is set in the PS or LR print dialog and the appropriate
paper/printer icc profile is selected.
In the Epson printer driver dialog, color management is turned OFF. I
am still using my Epson R2880 which meets all my current needs with
regard to performance and print quality. I am always a little amazed
that the prints are as good as they are.

Yet I envy Eric and his P800, but I just don't believe I could improve
on the print quality I am getting right now. Any improvement provided
by the P800 is probably going to be subtle.
--
Regards,

Savageduck

On 2017-02-19 03:11:25 +0000, PeterN
said:

On 2/18/2017 6:08 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:


http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Organizing_and_Optimizing_Photos.html


Actually

I have been using
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2_ProPhoto.tif
which

I obtained from the Steinmuller & Jurgens web site. I have also
used a number of test prints of my own contriving including
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0Composite.jpg
which was constructed with an Adobe RGB color space.

I've carried out quite a number of print trials and the results have
got me puzzled.

My original post arose from my attempts to find out what really is
going on.



One of my friends was having issues with printing. He did a lot of
research, and took tons of notes. He decided to publish his notes,
which are available for sale on his website.
http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Organizing_and_Optimizing_Photos.html

He

actually sells those??
Much of that information is available free.

BTW his website contains a lot of links, and some really neat images.
http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Homepage.html

....er, OK.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 22:11:25 -0500, PeterN
wrote:

On 2/18/2017 6:08 PM, Eric Stevens wrote:


http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Organizing_and_Optimizing_Photos.html


Actually I have been using
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...2_ProPhoto.tif
which I obtained from the Steinmuller & Jurgens web site. I have also
used a number of test prints of my own contriving including
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...0Composite.jpg
which was constructed with an Adobe RGB color space.

I've carried out quite a number of print trials and the results have
got me puzzled.

My original post arose from my attempts to find out what really is
going on.



One of my friends was having issues with printing. He did a lot of
research, and took tons of notes. He decided to publish his notes, which
are available for sale on his website.
http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Organizing_and_Optimizing_Photos.html

They seem to cover everything except the problem I am interested in.
:-(

BTW his website contains a lot of links, and some really neat images.
http://www.ivanrothman.com/Wildlife_photography/Homepage.html
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Sat, 18 Feb 2017 21:36:39 -0500, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

How well they can be calibrated for
different workspaces, papers, etc. depend on the quality of their
firmware and drivers.

nope. what matters are the capabilities and quality of the product
itself, as well as the tools used to do the calibration/profiling.

The matter is further complicated for printing in that the calibration
is dependent on the ink system and the media. The ink system doesn't
usually change much (except in the case of black inks for the Epson
P800) but the media is widely variable.

all you need is a printer profile for the printer/paper/ink combo
you're using. ideally, it's custom done for each batch of ink and
paper, but the standard epson profiles are good enough for all but the
most precise demands.

But then you have the choice of color management by Photo Shop or by
the printer.

yep. choose one or the other. don't choose both (or neither), a mistake
that happens more often than one might think.

Then, for a start, printer settings include EPSON
Standard sRGB, Adobe RGB, Photo enhance, ICM, and OFF. For all of
these (except OFF) there are further advanced settings which enable
color adjustments.

see above. if you choose photoshop, set the printer's management to
off. otherwise, use icm.

It doesn't seem to work very well.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens