digiKam › digikam-users

Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Classic

List

Threaded

22 messages Options

Paulux

Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Hello,

Some web printing sites deliver ICC profile suited for theyre own professionnal printers in order to adapt your pictures and make soft proofing.

If it's easy to enable soft-proofing in Digikam with any ICC profile you want (for instance photoweb-V4.icc), in the color space convertion tool, you only can choose the default kdcraw profiles (ie sRGB, Adobe RGB, Wide Gamut and Kodak Prophoto RGB) and the screen profiles installed on the system, but not another profile like photoweb-V4.icc (even if its placed in the same folder than the others profiles).

How could I do it ?

Thanks for your ideas

Clark

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Paulux

Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

I've a precision to make : as I understand the Digikam way to manage ICC profile, it now (I'm sure it wasn't the case in the past) sorts profiles by type (i.e. the output profiles menu only shows and manages output type profiles, and so on). That's roughly a good idea for the digikam control panel, BUT not for the color space conversion tool in picture editor and batch tool. This one only shows display ICC profiles, but it should offer output ICC profiles in order to completely control the colors behavior before print works, especially with remote laboratories.

Is it exist a way to convert the color space of a picture in an output ICC profile ?

If not, I will open a request in the bugtracker.

Regards,

PLX

De : Paulux <[hidden email]>
À : "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Envoyé le : Samedi 1 Octobre 2011 12h55
Objet : [Digikam-users] Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Hello,

Some web printing sites deliver ICC profile suited for theyre own professionnal printers in order to adapt your pictures and make soft proofing.

How could I do it ?

Thanks for your ideas

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Martin (KDE)

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Am 06.10.2011 21:12, schrieb Paulux:
> I've a precision to make : as I understand the Digikam way to manage ICC
> profile, it now (I'm sure it wasn't the case in the past) sorts profiles
> by type (i.e. the output profiles menu only shows and manages output
> type profiles, and so on). That's roughly a good idea for the digikam
> control panel, BUT not for the color space conversion tool in picture
> editor and batch tool. This one only shows display ICC profiles, but it
> should offer output ICC profiles in order to completely control the
> colors behavior before print works, especially with remote laboratories.

I don't think it is a good idea to convert a photo to the colour space
of the printing machine. These profiles should be used for soft proofing
only and this has nothing to do with the workspace colour profile (these
must not and mostly do not match the display profile).

For soft proofing you can use the softproof funktion of digikam. At
least in DK 1.9 you can set up a soft proof profile and switch between
soft proof and normal view (in showview).

Martin

>
> Is it exist a way to convert the color space of a picture in an output
> ICC profile ?
>
> If not, I will open a request in the bugtracker.
>
> Regards,
>
> PLX
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *De :* Paulux <[hidden email]>
> *À :* "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
> *Envoyé le :* Samedi 1 Octobre 2011 12h55
> *Objet :* [Digikam-users] Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures
>
> Hello,
>
> Some web printing sites deliver ICC profile suited for theyre own
> professionnal printers in order to adapt your pictures and make soft
> proofing.
>
> If it's easy to enable soft-proofing in Digikam with any ICC profile you
> want (for instance photoweb-V4.icc), in the color space convertion tool,
> you only can choose the default kdcraw profiles (ie sRGB, Adobe RGB,
> Wide Gamut and Kodak Prophoto RGB) and the screen profiles installed on
> the system, but not another profile like photoweb-V4.icc (even if its
> placed in the same folder than the others profiles).
>
> How could I do it ?
>
> Thanks for your ideas

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Remco Viëtor

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

On Friday 07 October 2011 07:31:05 Martin wrote:

> Am 06.10.2011 21:12, schrieb Paulux:
> > I've a precision to make : as I understand the Digikam way to manage ICC
> > profile, it now (I'm sure it wasn't the case in the past) sorts profiles
> > by type (i.e. the output profiles menu only shows and manages output
> > type profiles, and so on). That's roughly a good idea for the digikam
> > control panel, BUT not for the color space conversion tool in picture
> > editor and batch tool. This one only shows display ICC profiles, but it
> > should offer output ICC profiles in order to completely control the
> > colors behavior before print works, especially with remote laboratories.
>
> I don't think it is a good idea to convert a photo to the colour space
> of the printing machine. These profiles should be used for soft proofing
> only and this has nothing to do with the workspace colour profile (these
> must not and mostly do not match the display profile).
>

..
Even worse: screen and printer profiles are NOT colour spaces, but only output
corrections from a (device-independent) colour space to an imperfect output
device. They are specific for a combination of a colour space and a device.

A colour space describes how a colour we can see under standardised lighting
conditions is encoded in an RGB triplet. This is absolutely device-
independent.

So a colour workspace cannot 'match' a display profile, they are completely
different beasts and should be used together to get the best output possible.

Yes, I know both colour spaces and device profiles have .icc or .icm
extensions, but again, they are completely different concepts.

So, please leave your images in the sRGB colour space, unless you REALLY know
what you are doing:
a lot of questions concerning dark, muddy, unsaturated colours in prints come
from people using e.g. Adobe RGB as editing colour space, and then sending of
those images to a commercial printer (99+ % of those expect sRGB and don't
check...)

Remco
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Rinus

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Hi Remco,

Could you explain this to me this:
If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces, and
the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different prints.
The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
with native canon printerdriver.
I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu with
Turboprint.
Is this the proof that different software interpreted color profiles in
there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?
BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.

As always TIA for your thoughts.
Rinus

Op 07-10-11 08:20, Remco Viëtor schreef:

> On Friday 07 October 2011 07:31:05 Martin wrote:
>> Am 06.10.2011 21:12, schrieb Paulux:
>>> I've a precision to make : as I understand the Digikam way to manage ICC
>>> profile, it now (I'm sure it wasn't the case in the past) sorts profiles
>>> by type (i.e. the output profiles menu only shows and manages output
>>> type profiles, and so on). That's roughly a good idea for the digikam
>>> control panel, BUT not for the color space conversion tool in picture
>>> editor and batch tool. This one only shows display ICC profiles, but it
>>> should offer output ICC profiles in order to completely control the
>>> colors behavior before print works, especially with remote laboratories.
>> I don't think it is a good idea to convert a photo to the colour space
>> of the printing machine. These profiles should be used for soft proofing
>> only and this has nothing to do with the workspace colour profile (these
>> must not and mostly do not match the display profile).
>>
> ..
> Even worse: screen and printer profiles are NOT colour spaces, but only output
> corrections from a (device-independent) colour space to an imperfect output
> device. They are specific for a combination of a colour space and a device.
>
> A colour space describes how a colour we can see under standardised lighting
> conditions is encoded in an RGB triplet. This is absolutely device-
> independent.
>
> So a colour workspace cannot 'match' a display profile, they are completely
> different beasts and should be used together to get the best output possible.
>
> Yes, I know both colour spaces and device profiles have .icc or .icm
> extensions, but again, they are completely different concepts.
>
> So, please leave your images in the sRGB colour space, unless you REALLY know
> what you are doing:
> a lot of questions concerning dark, muddy, unsaturated colours in prints come
> from people using e.g. Adobe RGB as editing colour space, and then sending of
> those images to a commercial printer (99+ % of those expect sRGB and don't
> check...)
>
> Remco
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Remco Viëtor

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:

> Hi Remco,
>
> Could you explain this to me this:
> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces, and
> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different prints.
> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
> with native canon printerdriver.
> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu with
> Turboprint.
> Is this the proof that different software interpreted color profiles in
> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?

First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
shop....
And no, I don't think the colour profile is interpreted differently (as the
profile only says 'for color (A,B,C) use colour (A+a,B+b, C+c)' )

That said, there's a number of factors influencing colour reproduction on an
inkjet printer: paper type, inks used, amount of ink used, etc. As with a
screen, if you change any of these factors, you'll have to adapt your profile.
And I bet Ubuntu doesn't use the same driver as windows (so amount of ink used
per dot can very well change). The problem here is that you might not apply
any corrections, but the drivers will have to send certain settings to the
printer. If these differ between drivers, you're out of luck.
Or you have to start profiling your printer/paper combination, which requires
a different spectrophotometer than for screen profiling (and those aren't the
cheapest either).
Final solution:
Have a profile made to order:
- download a test image (colour patches of known hues)
- pick the settings and paper you want to use,
- print the test image,
- send it to the provider of the test image, who will create the profile and
send it to you (against payment...). Have a look in Google ;)
Once again, such a profile is valid for ONE printer/paper combination, with
ONE set of driver settings. Change anything, and you'll have to get another
profile... (same as for screen: change any setting there and you'll have to
reprofile)

> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.

Sorry, I'm purely an OpenSUSE guy, can't help you there. But have a look at
the argyllcms suite, their docs might help.

To finish, some links colour management:
* - http://www.printerprofiling.com/index.html
* - http://jcornuz.wordpress.com/2007/12/06/printing-3-printer-color-
management/#more-175 (fairly old, but has the basics)
* - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_color_management (mainly concerned with
display profiling)

Hope this helps clarifying things a bit...
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Martin (KDE)

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Am 07.10.2011 13:06, schrieb Remco Viëtor:

> On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:
>> Hi Remco,
>>
>> Could you explain this to me this:
>> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
>> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces, and
>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different prints.
>> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
>> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
>> with native canon printerdriver.
>> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu with
>> Turboprint.
>> Is this the proof that different software interpreted color profiles in
>> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?

Remco was faster than me, so just my small additions.

>
> First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
> shop....
> And no, I don't think the colour profile is interpreted differently (as the
> profile only says 'for color (A,B,C) use colour (A+a,B+b, C+c)' )
>
> That said, there's a number of factors influencing colour reproduction on an
> inkjet printer: paper type, inks used, amount of ink used, etc. As with a
> screen, if you change any of these factors, you'll have to adapt your profile.
> And I bet Ubuntu doesn't use the same driver as windows (so amount of ink used
> per dot can very well change). The problem here is that you might not apply
> any corrections, but the drivers will have to send certain settings to the
> printer. If these differ between drivers, you're out of luck.
> Or you have to start profiling your printer/paper combination, which requires
> a different spectrophotometer than for screen profiling (and those aren't the
> cheapest either).
> Final solution:
> Have a profile made to order:
> - download a test image (colour patches of known hues)
> - pick the settings and paper you want to use,
> - print the test image,
> - send it to the provider of the test image, who will create the profile and
> send it to you (against payment...). Have a look in Google ;)
> Once again, such a profile is valid for ONE printer/paper combination, with
> ONE set of driver settings. Change anything, and you'll have to get another
> profile... (same as for screen: change any setting there and you'll have to
> reprofile)

Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#PP1
here especial the part where reading the test chart is done with a
camera or a scanner.

But Attention: This is in no way perfect. But If you own a good scanner
it will be better than using no profile at all.

I for my part don't print photos at home (as Remco didn't). To me the
quality and efford is not worth the money. Choose a shop which supports
colour profiles (local or net). I use fotocommunity-prints (Germany) and
am happy with the results. They profile their machines every day.

>
>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.

I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work great.

Regards
Martin
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Rinus

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Thank you Remco and Martin for your detailed and to the point responses.
It has been all very informative.
I had a dream but my final conclusion is that I am doomed to share my
life with windows.

Once again I have to pray:
God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
Courage to change the things I can,
And wisdom to know the difference.
(from Niehburh I think)

Best regards,
Rinus

Op 07-10-11 13:19, Martin (KDE) schreef:

> Am 07.10.2011 13:06, schrieb Remco Viëtor:
>> On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:
>>> Hi Remco,
>>>
>>> Could you explain this to me this:
>>> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
>>> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces, and
>>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different prints.
>>> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
>>> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
>>> with native canon printerdriver.
>>> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu wit
>>> Turboprint.
>>> Is this the proof that different software interpreted color profiles in
>>> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?
> Remco was faster than me, so just my small additions.
>
>> First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
>> shop....

I need to be in control because of to many disappointments and no refunds.

>> And no, I don't think the colour profile is interpreted differently (as the
>> profile only says 'for color (A,B,C) use colour (A+a,B+b, C+c)' )
>>
>> That said, there's a number of factors influencing colour reproduction on an
>> inkjet printer: paper type, inks used, amount of ink used, etc. As with a
>> screen, if you change any of these factors, you'll have to adapt your profile.
>> And I bet Ubuntu doesn't use the same driver as windows (so amount of ink used
>> per dot can very well change). The problem here is that you might not apply
>> any corrections, but the drivers will have to send certain settings to the
>> printer. If these differ between drivers, you're out of luck.

yes so it is

>> Or you have to start profiling your printer/paper combination, which requires
>> a different spectrophotometer than for screen profiling (and those aren't the
>> cheapest either).
>> Final solution:
>> Have a profile made to order:
>> - download a test image (colour patches of known hues)
>> - pick the settings and paper you want to use,
>> - print the test image,
>> - send it to the provider of the test image, who will create the profile and
>> send it to you (against payment...). Have a look in Google ;)
>> Once again, such a profile is valid for ONE printer/paper combination, with
>> ONE set of driver settings. Change anything, and you'll have to get another
>> profile... (same as for screen: change any setting there and you'll have to
>> reprofile)
> Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
> http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#PP1

looks realy complicated to me.

> here especial the part where reading the test chart is done with a
> camera or a scanner.
>
> But Attention: This is in no way perfect. But If you own a good scanner
> it will be better than using no profile at all.
>
> I for my part don't print photos at home (as Remco didn't). To me the
> quality and efford is not worth the money. Choose a shop which supports
> colour profiles (local or net). I use fotocommunity-prints (Germany) and
> am happy with the results. They profile their machines every day.
>
>>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
>>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.
> I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work great.

Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
readings?
>
> Regards
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Martin (KDE)

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Am 07.10.2011 14:50, schrieb sleepless:
> Thank you Remco and Martin for your detailed and to the point responses.
> It has been all very informative.
> I had a dream but my final conclusion is that I am doomed to share my
> life with windows.

I would not second that. I work with Linux exclusively since more than
ten years. Only for my tax software I run windows once a year. And even
colour management is possible.

Working with Linux is different and as such difficult to many users. But
colour management is difficult regardless of the OS. Setting it up is
only a small part of it. Most software hides the complexity on windows
and MacOS but with this takes away the flexibility. It is the same with
photo handling. Why on earth do camera manufacturer remove raw
processing on cheep cameras without an option to enable it? Because no
one wants to use it? Because users get confused by that option? Same is
true for many other settings.

Many are satisfied with this setup but those who are not, what can they
do besides buying a different piece of hardware?

I don't care if other users uses windows. If they are satisfied with it
its OK. But many do not know that there is an alternate option out there
which fits their needs as well.

But this has nothing to do with digikam.

Martin

>
> Once again I have to pray:
> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
> Courage to change the things I can,
> And wisdom to know the difference.
> (from Niehburh I think)
>
> Best regards,
> Rinus
>
>
> Op 07-10-11 13:19, Martin (KDE) schreef:
>> Am 07.10.2011 13:06, schrieb Remco Viëtor:
>>> On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:
>>>> Hi Remco,
>>>>
>>>> Could you explain this to me this:
>>>> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
>>>> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces,
>>>> and
>>>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different
>>>> prints.
>>>> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
>>>> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
>>>> with native canon printerdriver.
>>>> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu wit
>>>> Turboprint.
>>>> Is this the proof that different software interpreted color
>>>> profiles in
>>>> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?
>> Remco was faster than me, so just my small additions.
>>
>>> First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
>>> shop....
> I need to be in control because of to many disappointments and no refunds.
>>> And no, I don't think the colour profile is interpreted differently
>>> (as the
>>> profile only says 'for color (A,B,C) use colour (A+a,B+b, C+c)' )
>>>
>>> That said, there's a number of factors influencing colour
>>> reproduction on an
>>> inkjet printer: paper type, inks used, amount of ink used, etc. As
>>> with a
>>> screen, if you change any of these factors, you'll have to adapt your
>>> profile.
>>> And I bet Ubuntu doesn't use the same driver as windows (so amount of
>>> ink used
>>> per dot can very well change). The problem here is that you might not
>>> apply
>>> any corrections, but the drivers will have to send certain settings
>>> to the
>>> printer. If these differ between drivers, you're out of luck.
> yes so it is
>>> Or you have to start profiling your printer/paper combination, which
>>> requires
>>> a different spectrophotometer than for screen profiling (and those
>>> aren't the
>>> cheapest either).
>>> Final solution:
>>> Have a profile made to order:
>>> - download a test image (colour patches of known hues)
>>> - pick the settings and paper you want to use,
>>> - print the test image,
>>> - send it to the provider of the test image, who will create the
>>> profile and
>>> send it to you (against payment...). Have a look in Google ;)
>>> Once again, such a profile is valid for ONE printer/paper
>>> combination, with
>>> ONE set of driver settings. Change anything, and you'll have to get
>>> another
>>> profile... (same as for screen: change any setting there and you'll
>>> have to
>>> reprofile)
>> Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
>> http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#PP1
> looks realy complicated to me.
>> here especial the part where reading the test chart is done with a
>> camera or a scanner.
>>
>> But Attention: This is in no way perfect. But If you own a good scanner
>> it will be better than using no profile at all.
>>
>> I for my part don't print photos at home (as Remco didn't). To me the
>> quality and efford is not worth the money. Choose a shop which supports
>> colour profiles (local or net). I use fotocommunity-prints (Germany) and
>> am happy with the results. They profile their machines every day.
>>
>>>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
>>>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.
>> I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work
>> great.
> Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
> readings?
>>
>> Regards
>> Martin
>> _______________________________________________
>> Digikam-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Rinus

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Op 07-10-11 15:07, Martin (KDE) schreef:
> Am 07.10.2011 14:50, schrieb sleepless:
>> Thank you Remco and Martin for your detailed and to the point responses.
>> It has been all very informative.
>> I had a dream but my final conclusion is that I am doomed to share my
>> life with windows.
> I would not second that.
You may have missed the fact that I can make perfect prints from windows
probably because of the fact that I can use canons printerdriver there.

> I work with Linux exclusively since more than
> ten years. Only for my tax software I run windows once a year. And even
> colour management is possible.
>
> Working with Linux is different and as such difficult to many users. But
> colour management is difficult regardless of the OS. Setting it up is
> only a small part of it. Most software hides the complexity on windows
> and MacOS but with this takes away the flexibility. It is the same with
> photo handling. Why on earth do camera manufacturer remove raw
> processing on cheep cameras without an option to enable it? Because no
> one wants to use it? Because users get confused by that option? Same is
> true for many other settings.
>
> Many are satisfied with this setup but those who are not, what can they
> do besides buying a different piece of hardware?
>
> I don't care if other users uses windows. If they are satisfied with it
> its OK. But many do not know that there is an alternate option out there
> which fits their needs as well.
>
> But this has nothing to do with digikam.

Oh yes, it has. We digikammers need to be able to print, regardless of
the fact that canon wants us to use windows.

>
> Martin
>
>> Once again I have to pray:
>> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
>> Courage to change the things I can,
>> And wisdom to know the difference.
>> (from Niehburh I think)
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Rinus
>>
>>
>> Op 07-10-11 13:19, Martin (KDE) schreef:
>>> Am 07.10.2011 13:06, schrieb Remco Viëtor:
>>>> On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:
>>>>> Hi Remco,
>>>>>
>>>>> Could you explain this to me this:
>>>>> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
>>>>> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces,
>>>>> and
>>>>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different
>>>>> prints.
>>>>> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
>>>>> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
>>>>> with native canon printerdriver.
>>>>> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu wit
>>>>> Turboprint.
>>>>> Is this the proof that different software interpreted color
>>>>> profiles in
>>>>> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?
>>> Remco was faster than me, so just my small additions.
>>>
>>>> First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
>>>> shop....
>> I need to be in control because of to many disappointments and no refunds.
>>>> And no, I don't think the colour profile is interpreted differently
>>>> (as the
>>>> profile only says 'for color (A,B,C) use colour (A+a,B+b, C+c)' )
>>>>
>>>> That said, there's a number of factors influencing colour
>>>> reproduction on an
>>>> inkjet printer: paper type, inks used, amount of ink used, etc. As
>>>> with a
>>>> screen, if you change any of these factors, you'll have to adapt your
>>>> profile.
>>>> And I bet Ubuntu doesn't use the same driver as windows (so amount of
>>>> ink used
>>>> per dot can very well change). The problem here is that you might not
>>>> apply
>>>> any corrections, but the drivers will have to send certain settings
>>>> to the
>>>> printer. If these differ between drivers, you're out of luck.
>> yes so it is
>>>> Or you have to start profiling your printer/paper combination, which
>>>> requires
>>>> a different spectrophotometer than for screen profiling (and those
>>>> aren't the
>>>> cheapest either).
>>>> Final solution:
>>>> Have a profile made to order:
>>>> - download a test image (colour patches of known hues)
>>>> - pick the settings and paper you want to use,
>>>> - print the test image,
>>>> - send it to the provider of the test image, who will create the
>>>> profile and
>>>> send it to you (against payment...). Have a look in Google ;)
>>>> Once again, such a profile is valid for ONE printer/paper
>>>> combination, with
>>>> ONE set of driver settings. Change anything, and you'll have to get
>>>> another
>>>> profile... (same as for screen: change any setting there and you'll
>>>> have to
>>>> reprofile)
>>> Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
>>> http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#PP1
>> looks realy complicated to me.
>>> here especial the part where reading the test chart is done with a
>>> camera or a scanner.
>>>
>>> But Attention: This is in no way perfect. But If you own a good scanner
>>> it will be better than using no profile at all.
>>>
>>> I for my part don't print photos at home (as Remco didn't). To me the
>>> quality and efford is not worth the money. Choose a shop which supports
>>> colour profiles (local or net). I use fotocommunity-prints (Germany) and
>>> am happy with the results. They profile their machines every day.
>>>
>>>>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
>>>>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.
>>> I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work
>>> great.
>> Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
>> readings?
>>> Regards
>>> Martin
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Digikam-users mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Digikam-users mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users
>

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Remco Viëtor

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Rinus

On Friday 07 October 2011 14:50:08 sleepless wrote:
> Thank you Remco and Martin for your detailed and to the point responses.
> It has been all very informative.
> I had a dream but my final conclusion is that I am doomed to share my
> life with windows.

No, not necessarily. I think you are going at it in the wrong way, using trial
and error to get your prints looking good. I'd try and find someone (person or
web site) that can create custom profiles, and have them create a profile (or
a few profiles) for the printer/ink/paper combinations you use. I found one
American site where they propose to do just that for $30 per profile (to be
compared with the amount of paper and ink you use to set up the printer...)

...
> >>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here,
> >>> no
> >>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never
> >>> change.
> >
> > I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work
> > great.
> Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
> readings?

Iirc, there's a tool to set a global profile in the Argyll suite. At this
stage, no equipment to do any kind of readings is needed, it's a small
programme that you run at startup or login to install a display profile
globally (just remember NOT to use a display profile in Digikam or elsewhere
after starting this...)

Have a look at their site (http://www.argyllcms.com/) I found their
instructions easy enough to follow.
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Martin (KDE)

Re: Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Rinus

Rinus

your replies are difficult to read. Can you add an empty line before and
after your comments? with this your comments are easier to find. I
missed some of your comments until I read Remcos reply.

Am 07.10.2011 14:50, schrieb sleepless:

> Thank you Remco and Martin for your detailed and to the point responses.
> It has been all very informative.
> I had a dream but my final conclusion is that I am doomed to share my
> life with windows.
>
> Once again I have to pray:
> God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change,
> Courage to change the things I can,
> And wisdom to know the difference.
> (from Niehburh I think)
>
> Best regards,
> Rinus
>
>
> Op 07-10-11 13:19, Martin (KDE) schreef:
>> Am 07.10.2011 13:06, schrieb Remco Viëtor:
>>> On Friday 07 October 2011 11:59:19 sleepless wrote:
>>>> Hi Remco,
>>>>
>>>> Could you explain this to me this:
>>>> If I print from native Windows 7, or from windows XP in Virtualbox on
>>>> Linux or from Ubuntu, and in all setups choose the same colorspaces,
>>>> and
>>>> the same paper and no corrections or whatever I get tree different
>>>> prints.
>>>> The only decent prints I get without heavy color adjustments on the
>>>> source is in my windows 7 setup, (exactly there where I not want to be)
>>>> with native canon printerdriver.
>>>> I lost sofar about 50 A4´s testing for a good result on Ubuntu wit
>>>> Turboprint.
>>>> Is this the proof that different software interpreted color
>>>> profiles in
>>>> there own way, and thus the faillure of colormangement?
>> Remco was faster than me, so just my small additions.
>>
>>> First, I don't print at home, the few I need are better done by a local
>>> shop....
> I need to be in control because of to many disappointments and no refunds.

Try a photo lab using colour management (i.E.
www.fotocommunity-prints.de). These photos are not cheep but the result
are reproducible.

...
>> Or maybe a so called poor man profiling:
>> http://www.argyllcms.com/doc/Scenarios.html#PP1
> looks realy complicated to me.

Na, it is not really hard. The difficult part is to understand what is
going on. Read the stuff several times and try it out. It is realy cheep
to do. All you need is a Test target (IT8 for example which costs about
20Euros if you order it from Wolf Faust) and a scanner.

The scans by the way are getting much better colour wise than without
the colour profile. Sane is capable of handling profiles.

>> here especial the part where reading the test chart is done with a
>> camera or a scanner.
>>
>> But Attention: This is in no way perfect. But If you own a good scanner
>> it will be better than using no profile at all.
>>
>> I for my part don't print photos at home (as Remco didn't). To me the
>> quality and efford is not worth the money. Choose a shop which supports
>> colour profiles (local or net). I use fotocommunity-prints (Germany) and
>> am happy with the results. They profile their machines every day.
>>
>>>> BTW In Ubuntu systemwide color mangement does not work at all here, no
>>>> matter which profile I choose, the colors on the monitor never change.
>> I don't use internal tools for this. I use argyls tools and they work
>> great.
> Argyll tools is new to me, but you mean you have equipment at home to do
> readings?

Yes, I have a (cheep) colorimeter (Spyder 2 - but I would not recommend
it any more). I profile/calibrate my monitor every now and then. With
the argyll tools you can profile as many monitors as you want. And you
can change every parameter you want. With the original software you can
only profile one. This is part of the freedom you have with free
software. Argyll runs on windows as well btw.

IMHO it is not possible to adjust colour in photos without a
calibrated/profiled monitor. You simply don't have any clue what this
change may look like on paper or different monitor.

I don't have a photospectrometer for profiling/calibrating printers.
This stuff cost 300Euros and more.

But at the end it is all about what you want and what you need. If you
are not satisfied with the colour result of your prints (either from
your printer or from the lab next corner) there is no alternative to
profiling/calibrating the hardware you use.

Regards
Martin

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Paulux

Re : Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Remco Viëtor

Thanks to all for answers.

@Martin (KDE) : thanks, I know what is soft proofing and how to use it in DK ;) (even if the result is not satisfying, too red), and it's absolutely not what I want to do.

@Remco (french ?) : English is not my native language, so perhaps I've not clearly explained my thought : I know the differences between color spaces and ICC profiles, but the only tool to convert a picture in this domain is the color space conversion tool. And that's exactly what I whant to do (because I kown what I'm doing, thx).

Commercial printing services often (always) make automatic corrections on the pictures you send them. Although, some of them offer the ability to refuse this way and purpose ICC profiles for each combination of printer, paper and ink they use. So if you want to use their services, you MUST convert you picture in the ICC profile corresponding to the product you want.

The quickly way to do it with DK should that color space conversion tool allows to choose some output ICC profiles. How to do it ?

PLX

De : Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]>
À : digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open source <[hidden email]>
Envoyé le : Vendredi 7 Octobre 2011 8h20
Objet : Re: [Digikam-users] Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

On Friday 07 October 2011 07:31:05 Martin wrote:

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Martin (KDE)

Re: Re : Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Am Freitag, 7. Oktober 2011 schrieb Paulux:

> Thanks to all for answers.
>
> @Martin (KDE) : thanks, I know what is soft proofing and how to use
> it in DK ;) (even if the result is not satisfying, too red), and
> it's absolutely not what I want to do.
>
> @Remco (french ?) : English is not my native language, so perhaps
> I've not clearly explained my thought : I know the differences
> between color spaces and ICC profiles, but the only tool to
> convert a picture in this domain is the color space conversion
> tool. And that's exactly what I whant to do (because I kown what
> I'm doing, thx). Commercial printing services often (always) make
> automatic corrections on the pictures you send them. Although,
> some of them offer the ability to refuse this way and purpose ICC
> profiles for each combination of printer, paper and ink they use.
> So if you want to use their services, you MUST convert you picture
> in the ICC profile corresponding to the product you want.

Huch, that is new to me. My printing lab provides profiles and does
not require me to convert the pictures to any specific colour space.
An labs using automatic corrections are not worth the try for serious
photo printing. the results are unpredictable.

I still don't see the need for converting a photo to a output colour
profile (besides the lab requires it - but why?).

The only reason I can imagine of is if the printing colour space is
much smaller than the working colour space. Then you have the control
in how the colours should be corrected. But this can be done in the
working colour space (or a different working colour space) as well.
That's what the soft proofing for.

Do you have to separate the photo to CYMK as well?

Martin

>
> The quickly way to do it with DK should that color space conversion
> tool allows to choose some output ICC profiles. How to do it ?
>
> PLX
>
>
> ________________________________
> De : Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]>
> À : digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with
> the power of open source <[hidden email]> Envoyé le :
> Vendredi 7 Octobre 2011 8h20
> Objet : Re: [Digikam-users] Re : Choose another ICC profile for
> converting pictures
>
> On Friday 07 October 2011 07:31:05 Martin wrote:
> > Am 06.10.2011 21:12, schrieb Paulux:
> > > I've a precision to make : as I understand the Digikam way to
> > > manage ICC profile, it now (I'm sure it wasn't the case in the
> > > past) sorts profiles by type (i.e. the output profiles menu
> > > only shows and manages output type profiles, and so on).
> > > That's roughly a good idea for the digikam control panel, BUT
> > > not for the color space conversion tool in picture editor and
> > > batch tool. This one only shows display ICC profiles, but it
> > > should offer output ICC profiles in order to completely
> > > control the colors behavior before print works, especially
> > > with remote laboratories.
> >
> > I don't think it is a good idea to convert a photo to the colour
> > space of the printing machine. These profiles should be used for
> > soft proofing only and this has nothing to do with the workspace
> > colour profile (these must not and mostly do not match the
> > display profile).
>
> ..
> Even worse: screen and printer profiles are NOT colour spaces, but
> only output corrections from a (device-independent) colour space
> to an imperfect output device. They are specific for a combination
> of a colour space and a device.
>
> A colour space describes how a colour we can see under standardised
> lighting conditions is encoded in an RGB triplet. This is
> absolutely device- independent.
>
> So a colour workspace cannot 'match' a display profile, they are
> completely different beasts and should be used together to get the
> best output possible.
>
> Yes, I know both colour spaces and device profiles have .icc or
> .icm extensions, but again, they are completely different
> concepts.
>
> So, please leave your images in the sRGB colour space, unless you
> REALLY know what you are doing:
> a lot of questions concerning dark, muddy, unsaturated colours in
> prints come from people using e.g. Adobe RGB as editing colour
> space, and then sending of those images to a commercial printer
> (99+ % of those expect sRGB and don't check...)
>
> Remco
> _______________________________________________
> Digikam-users mailing list
> [hidden email]
> https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Marcel Wiesweg

Re: Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Paulux

>
> If it's easy to enable soft-proofing in Digikam with any ICC profile you
> want (for instance photoweb-V4.icc), in the color space convertion tool,
> you only can choose the default kdcraw profiles (ie sRGB, Adobe RGB, Wide
> Gamut and Kodak Prophoto RGB) and the screen profiles installed on the
> system, but not another profile like photoweb-V4.icc (even if its placed
> in the same folder than the others profiles).

It's a matter of a single line of code to add output profiles to the combo box
as well. Question to the expertise assembled in this list: Should we do it?

Marcel
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Paulux

Re : Re : Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Martin (KDE)

The conversion to an output color profile is always made in an calibrated workflow when you print : DK makes it itself, that's why you can specify an output color profile for your printer in DK's settings.

For printing labs, some (the more professionnals, perfect for unique jobs but not for mass ones) make properly the conversion from sRGB to the needed profile (in this case, I don't have any problem), some don't make anything if you refuse automatic corrections and ask you to convert your pictures in their ICC profiles.

And yes, sometimes (especially for prints on aluminium or PVC) I would need to separate pictures in CYMK, then in a corresponding profile.

De : Martin (KDE) <[hidden email]>
À : [hidden email]
Envoyé le : Vendredi 7 Octobre 2011 16h59
Objet : Re: [Digikam-users] Re : Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

Am Freitag, 7. Oktober 2011 schrieb Paulux:

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Remco Viëtor

Re: Re : Re : Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

On Friday 07 October 2011 17:29:31 Paulux wrote:

> The conversion to an output color profile is always made in an calibrated
> workflow when you print : DK makes it itself, that's why you can specify an
> output color profile for your printer in DK's settings. For printing labs,
> some (the more professionnals, perfect for unique jobs but not for mass
> ones) make properly the conversion from sRGB to the needed profile (in this
> case, I don't have any problem), some don't make anything if you refuse
> automatic corrections and ask you to convert your pictures in their ICC
> profiles.
>
> And yes, sometimes (especially for prints on aluminium or PVC) I would need
> to separate pictures in CYMK, then in a corresponding profile.

Could you provide links to these labs, please? It's always difficult to get
links to the good labs (or rather, to separate the good from the bad).

Remco
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Remco Viëtor

Re: Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Marcel Wiesweg

On Friday 07 October 2011 18:00:01 Marcel Wiesweg wrote:

> > If it's easy to enable soft-proofing in Digikam with any ICC profile you
> > want (for instance photoweb-V4.icc), in the color space convertion tool,
> > you only can choose the default kdcraw profiles (ie sRGB, Adobe RGB,
> > Wide
> > Gamut and Kodak Prophoto RGB) and the screen profiles installed on the
> > system, but not another profile like photoweb-V4.icc (even if its placed
> > in the same folder than the others profiles).
>
> It's a matter of a single line of code to add output profiles to the combo
> box as well. Question to the expertise assembled in this list: Should we do
> it?

I already see my (homemade) screen profiles in the list (having entered the
directory where they are stored in the corresponding configuration). So if
one, why not the other?

That said, I'm not at all convinced that applying an output profile to an
image ment for storage/archiving/distribution is a good idea in any case.
(well, I can imagine one case: you have to send the image to a device through
software that cannot apply a needed output profile).
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Paulux

Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

>Remco said : (well, I can imagine one case: you have to send the image to a device through

>software that cannot apply a needed output profile).

That's for this unique usage i want to convert my pictures : send it to a remote lab. And not at all for storage or archiving.

I'm going to send links of labs in a following mail

PLX

De : Remco Viëtor <[hidden email]>
À : digiKam - Home Manage your photographs as a professional with the power of open source <[hidden email]>
Envoyé le : Vendredi 7 Octobre 2011 19h24
Objet : Re: [Digikam-users] Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

On Friday 07 October 2011 18:00:01 Marcel Wiesweg wrote:

_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users

Martin (KDE)

Re: Re : Re : Re : Choose another ICC profile for converting pictures

In reply to this post by Paulux

Am Freitag, 7. Oktober 2011 schrieb Paulux:
> The conversion to an output color profile is always made in an
> calibrated workflow when you print : DK makes it itself, that's
> why you can specify an output color profile for your printer in
> DK's settings. For printing labs, some (the more professionnals,
> perfect for unique jobs but not for mass ones) make properly the
> conversion from sRGB to the needed profile (in this case, I don't
> have any problem), some don't make anything if you refuse
> automatic corrections and ask you to convert your pictures in
> their ICC profiles.

I never had this. What I once had as I disabled the automatic
optimization was very ugly contrast and colour casts. Since then I
only use a profiled enabled lab. Yes, it cost about double as the
cheaper one, but to me it is worth it. But I don't need that much
prints.

Martin

>
> And yes, sometimes (especially for prints on aluminium or PVC) I
> would need to separate pictures in CYMK, then in a corresponding
> profile.
>
>
_______________________________________________
Digikam-users mailing list
[hidden email]
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/digikam-users