|
Post by Bailey on Feb 8, 2019 10:00:21 GMT
Do We Need To Embed Profiles Into Image Files?If correct colour management and maintaining colour accuracy as much as possible as image files are moved from camera, to editing software, screens or printers, then the answer is a definite yes....Hopefully this explanation and analogy will make it clear as to why. First, we need to be aware that rgb colour values for a given true colour are device dependent and not absolute. For example, say an image pixel is set to rgb 0,128,0. Yes that will display as a shade of green. But the shade of green a screen will display will be relative to pure green (0,255,0) and every screen will display 0,255,0 slightly differently because of design parameters, manufacturing tolerances, screen settings and other factors. To standardise the colours a screen displays is where calibration comes in. But calibration is not the subject of this post. We need to embed profiles into image files whether we have a calibrated screen or not. The point I am making so far is that rgb values for a given true colour are device dependent. So how do we get around the fact that all screens will display a given colour slightly differently? This is where embedding the colour space that was used to create the image plays a vital role. Consider this analogy that hopefully explains. Lets say we have some text in Spanish on a sheet of paper that we need to translate to Greek on another piece of paper. The source and target pieces of paper are analogous to the colour spaces used by 2 different screens. The text on each piece of paper is analogous to the rgb values of an image in the respective colour space. Now, if we had a Spanish to Greek dictionary then the translation would be simple but lets say such a dictionary does not exist and so we then have to do the translation from Spanish to Greek via an intermediary language, say English, using a Spanish -> English and English -> Greek dictionary. This is exactly what happens in colour management when an image is transfered from one screen to another. The Spanish -> English dictionary is analogous to the colour profile of the source screen and the English -> Greek dictionary is analogous to the colour profile of the target screen. So when an image is opened on a different screen the colour management system uses the profile embedded in the image to convert the image's colours to a true colour (most likely Lab colour since Lab is device independent) using the embedded colour profile. This step is analogous to the source text being translated from Spanish to English. The colour management system then uses the target screen's profile to convert the Lab colours to the target screens colour space. This is analogous to translating the English text to Greek. So now, just like you have the original Spanish text translated to Greek on another piece of paper, you now have the colours in the image "translated" to the color space of the target screen. How closely the colours match on the 2 screens is mainly dependent on whether the source and target colour spaces/profiles are calibrated colour spaces or not. But that is a whole different discussion. So hopefully if you have read down to this line, you can see why it is vital to embed the colour space/profile that was used to create an image into image files to be used on other devices (screens, applications, printers) HTH someone
|
|
|
Post by michelb on Feb 8, 2019 21:03:02 GMT
Let's start from the beginning.
What's your working colour space? I mean, the numbers defining the RGB values for each pixel. For instance, if you have converted a raw file in ACR or LR, that could be sRGB, aRGB, ProPhoto... or your display profile. If the last choice, there is no way another user can know the colour space reference if you don't embed the display profile. If the profile is not embedded, external software will consider the pixels values as if they were sRGB. A color shift is to be expected, but probably less dramatic than editing in ProPhoto as working color space and 'removing the profile' in the file. If the display profile is embedded, that will be fine for you, probably fine for other users if they are using PS or LR, even PSE. You can't be sure with many other editing softwares. Furthermore, before being sure to say that you must always embed the profile in this case, you have to consider the advantages of using other colour spaces. Anyway some users might wrongly think that your display profile will have something to do with their own display profile. As you have explained, your display profile has become your working colour space. The embedded profile is expected to enable the colour management process to translate into the device independent (Lab...) profile, then translate it to their own display profile.
I think you'll agree that if your working space is not your display profile, embedding the display profile would be meaningless. So, we could concentrate on discussing the option of the display profile as the working space. I don't discuss that such an option requires embedding the profile.
Since this forum is centered around Elements, I want to say a few words about colour management in PSE, its limitations and the protection those limitations give to the typical users. I believe the colour management engine is the same than in Photoshop, but that many options in the menus have been masked to avoid a lot of traps. I'd like to detail those differences in another post, but for instance, the option to use the display profile as the working space is not available.
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Feb 9, 2019 0:57:16 GMT
I think you'll agree that if your working space is not your display profile, embedding the display profile would be meaningless. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one. Maybe not all devices/applications default to sRGB now and in the future who knows if another colour space will become the normally accepted default. Even for just archiving purposes it's best practice to embed the color profile that was used to create the image to help future proof it. I will never tell anyone to not bother embedding the colour profile, especially when in PSE it's only 1 extra click when you File->Save As and I notice that when I File->Process Multiple Files, my calibrated screen profile is automatically saved with each file anyway. I am using PSE 14. If anyone is still unclear about how colour management works from my explanation/analogy in my op, Adobe have an excellent diagram (right) showing a typical colour management flow. It is 100% consistent with what I posted in my op. It clearly shows that every image and display/output device must have a profile for proper and accurate colour management. For me personally, I have calibrated my monitors and profiled my 2 inkjet printers. In Colour Settings in my PSE 14 I have selected "No Color management" and so PSE uses my calibrated screen profile which is what I want and so results in very, very close colour matching with my prints. I use Gamutvision to view/overlay my custom profiles for QCíng and comparison purposes. My calibrated screen colour space is slightly larger than Adobe RGB in every direction except Adobe RGB has a slightly larger range of green tones. When I export a jpeg file from PSE I always embed my calibrated screen profile to maximise the probability that the target device will display my image's colours as close as possible to what I see on my screen. We have no control over the screen settings of any other device that someone might view images on or whether it is even calibrated. All we can do is hope for the best by embedding the colour profile we used to create the image. I believe embedding the colour profile is a good habit to get into, especially since the incremental increase in file size is miniscule and it helps future proof the image's colour integrity.
If an application or device doesn't use the embedded profile for some reason, then no harm is done anyway.
|
|
|
Post by michelb on Feb 9, 2019 20:40:52 GMT
"No color management": You should have stated that before. It's the first time I see someone advising to choose "No Color management". I can see how you can live with that in your own workflow, but all the advice I have seen is never to use that option except when you master all your colour parameters. That's why I had never tried how to work in Elements with that option. That made me discover why you insist on 'embedding' the profile. Without that option, you can't include the display profile when saving from Elements (something you can do from Photoshop).
The problem I have with the "No color management" option is the following. Since I can't output a file in ProPhoto from the ACR module (you get either sRGB when you optimize for screen and aRGB when you optimize for print), I have to use either a ProPhoto sample file or create one from Photoshop. The ProPhoto profile is recognized by PSE from the profile tag like the other profiles known to the full Photoshop. The working colour space is now ProPhoto, and the profile is tagged automatically when saving the file.
Now, I set the option to "no color management". When I open the photo, the embedded ProPhoto profile is discarded. The photo looks awfully discolored, which is normal since the ProPhoto space is much larger than sRGB or my calibrated display profile. If I want to save the result, I can tick the option to embbed my display profile... which does not help at all in this case.
Before that experiment, I thought that your choice of embedding the display profile was that discussed in that thread: So, I checked what is recommended by Ian Lyons: As you can see, the general consensus by experts is definitely not in favour of your advice.
|
|
|
Post by michelb on Feb 9, 2019 21:08:27 GMT
The choice of the 'No color management" has a result I did not expect. It automatically assigns the monitor profile when converting from ACR. That may be ok for you, since you have a similar gamut than the aRGB profile. I am pretty sure mine has a narrower colour space, so that can't be an advantage for me and most other users in this forum.
I don't want to take the risks of that option.
If I open a ProPhoto file, PSE will edit in the much wider color space as the working space. The file is already tagged and will keep its profile when saving, unless I choose to convert to sRGB or aRGB depending on the final output.
|
|
|
Post by Bailey on Feb 10, 2019 3:31:24 GMT
"No color management": You should have stated that before. It's the first time I see someone advising to choose "No Color management". ...
Well actually I did mention it previously. It was in one of your recent threads: Elements supports two color modes, aRGB for print, sRGB for display. ........but when you download from your camera those two modes are the one you can choose.
That is not quite correct. PSE also supports custom user profiles/color spaces which I have been doing for a few years now with no problem. If you select "No Color Management" in Color Settings, PSE uses the monitor's default color profile/color space. After I calibrate my monitor, I set the custom profile I created to be my screen's default profile so that PSE can use it. I set my camera to Adobe RGB color space which is larger that sRGB. I use the free Gamutvision application to view/overlay various color spaces for comparison and quality control of custom profile purposes. I use Exiftool to see what, if any, colour profile is embedded into a jpeg. When I do File->Save As in PSE my custom screen profile name is displayed in the dialogue box as an option to save with the image, which should always be done btw. hth
As you can see, the general consensus by experts is definitely not in favour of your advice. Actually, the dpreview link is in total agreement with my advice to embed a profile into exported image files. In the dpreview link you will see -
This is exactly what I posted in my OP and with the same reason. I have never seen anyone else suggest embedding profiles can be meaningless as you did earlier.
Regarding whether to embed the working colour space or the screen colour space seems to depend on who you ask. The view expressed in your 2 links is hardly a general consensus and I take their views as their opinion because no-one has yet explained how embedding a screen profile will result in a less accurate rendering on another monitor compared to embedding a working colour space. If the working color space is larger than the screen colour space then any colours in the image that are outside the screen's colour space are going to be rendered according to the screen's Rendering Intent setting for the screen anyway...ie...the colours will be shifted.
I have stated that I embed the screen profile. I have never said that is what others should do. What I said is that the profile the image was created in should be embedded. Whether it is the working colour space or screen colour space people can choose for themselves. In my case they are the same colour space (since my calibrated screen colour space is about the same size as Adobe RGB) and I get very, very good results both in print and screen display. Update:I have done a quick experiment to determine which profile (Working colour space or Screen colour space) PSE actually embeds into a saved image file. Since I use the same colour space for both, it doesn't matter and I have always assumed it's the Screen colour space that is embedded. Actually PSE embeds the working colour space. While leaving my screen colour space/profile setting to be my calibrated screen profile in the OS, I opened an image in PSE and then converted the image to Adobe RGB using Image->Convert Color profile. I then did a File-Save As to see which profile I will be given the option to save, screen profile or working profile. This time it gave me the option to save the Adobe RGB colour space.
|
|