Residual brown cast even with custom ICC RGB printer profile

[Andprayforrain]

I purchased a custom ICC printer profile for my Pro-1000. The profile gives me the best results so far, in terms of not only sharpness but also neutrality. And it gives me very accurate soft proofing.

With soft proofing on, my calibrated monitor shows a brownish colour cast, which comes through in the print.

I print using the very same settings I used for the test prints.

Does a residual colour cast always mean there’s a problem, such as double-profiling? Or should one always expect a residual colour cast even with the best profile?

If Photoshop can use information in the ICC profile to adjust my monitor to reveal an inherent colour cast, why doesn’t it use the information to neutralize my output?

I use Canson Platine Fibre Rag. Canson promises warm white tones. Should the shadows and midtones be neutral nevertheless?

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

A warmtoned paper base will definitely affect all other colors. The paper base is the white in your photographs, and this is important for other colors too, since all but very dark tones are rendered by a combination of the paper base tint and the inks laid down on the paper.

 

[x-ray]

I’m not sure I can give an explanation as to why theICC profile doesn’t correct your image other than the system doesn’t know what your image is supposed to look like. It only provides a calibration to your monitor so you can make the determination as to color. It’s just the way it works. What it’s doing is adjusting your monitor to a color standard that would be the same on any monitor you view it on.

If you’re getting a color cast you have a problem. Have you tried imbedding that icc profile in your image before editing? You can do that in photoshop. It sounds like the issue is occurring prior to your editing process. Look in photoshop and go to assign profile and see what you’re getting. Assign your icc profile and try that.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

I’m not sure I can give an explanation as to why theICC profile doesn’t correct your image other than the system doesn’t know what your image is supposed to look like. It only provides a calibration to your monitor so you can make the determination as to color. It’s just the way it works. What it’s doing is adjusting your monitor to a color standard that would be the same on any monitor you view it on.

If you’re getting a color cast you have a problem. Have you tried imbedding that icc profile in your image before editing? You can do that in photoshop. It sounds like the issue is occurring prior to your editing process. Look in photoshop and go to assign profile and see what you’re getting. Assign your icc profile and try that.

You don't want to assign a printer profile to an image for editing. Editing should only be done in device-independent color spaces like Adobe RGB, sRGB, or Prophoto RGB. After editing, then the image is converted to the printer profile to print.

 

[x-ray]

I’m just suggesting he see what happens. I’m thinking he has an incorrect profile assigned to his image when editing. He may have photoshop set to an incorrect profile or colorspace or discarding the one he wants. In the early days of digital no one really understood the importance of profiles or color space and when the prepress house opened my files it would indicate a mismatch or discard my profile. You can guess what happened then.

I create custom camera profiles and they make a huge difference. I assign them in Lightroom and carry them through the process. I certainly understand the difference in a printer and camera profile.

It was a suggestion to see what happened and would indicate if he was discarding or applying an incorrect profile along the way.

Edit: a color space is different than a profile. You assign your profile prior to editing and edit within a color space. Two different animals.

 

[mrtoml]

Have you tried using the profile available from Canson for comparison? If you get similar results with that it sounds like a printer issue or a bad profile? If you have any Canon paper their profiles are very good with this printer. Do you gat the cast with Canon paper and profiles?

I have a pro 1000 and I have not encountered colour casts on my prints.

 

[zeitz]

I have used a Pro 1000 for years and I have not had this problem. It would help to know what processing software you are using or what computer you are using.

I never use soft proofing. I use Canon profiles for some Canon papers. (Note that there are two profiles for some Canon papers - one for dye ink and one for pigment ink. When I installed my Pro 1000, the dye ink profile was installed! I had to manually install the pigment ink profile.) I use custom profiles made by my Canon value-added dealer for Pictorico and Hahnemuhle papers.

My first suggestion is to check that the same settings are used in the computer printer driver, the printer's driver and on the printer's screen. You would think that making these settings in one location would be enough, but all three have to have the same settings.

Have you tried using Canon's Print Studio software? I was not been able to get Print Studio to work with a version of Photoshop, after an upgrade, and have quit trying to use it.

It is possible to apply the profile to the file itself in Photoshop and print in Print Studio without applying a profile. This is the way my value-added dealer (a Hahnemuhle master printer) always prints.

Other people just give up on the Canon software and the post-processor software and use a separate Raster Image Processor (RIP) software.

 

[mrtoml]

I use the free Canon Professional Print and Layout software. It incorporates soft proofing (although I never use it) and it gives a lot of control. I have never had a problem with this software, but I don't think it works as a plugin. It is a standalone programme.

 

[Andprayforrain]

Thanks, all, for your replies.

I should point out that I don’t know for certain what the problem is. It may be simple colour inconsistency—eg, Lucia ink on Canson Platine Fibre Rag gives a brown cast at night under incandescent and LED lighting.

But I do have a print on Epson Exhibition Fibre that is inherently more neutral, not only during the day under diffuse daylight but also at night. Maybe Epson ink on Exhibition Fibre gives better colour consistency.

My general workflow with a black and white digital negative (DNG):

• Open the DNG in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR).
  • It’s a monochrome file, so no colour cast.
• After making the basic common adjustments, I open the file in Photoshop for selective editing.
  • ACR creates a 16-bit TIFF file and assigns the gray gamma 2.2 profile.
• After editing the file, I create a flattened copy for printing.
  • Like Zeitz, I ensure that my print settings everywhere are consistent.
    • I access printer preferences via a) the Windows printer settings in control panel and b) the printer settings in Photoshop’s print program (ctrl+p). I ensure Photoshop provides no colour management.
• I print using Canon’s Professional Print & Layout and let that software manage colours: relative colorimetric, custom ICC printer profile.

Without soft proofing, my calibrated monitor shows image grays that agree with Photoshop’s background grays. With soft proofing on, the image grays are noticeably warmer than Photoshop’s background grays, and they agree with my print grays. It seems the custom ICC profile is accurate. The fact that the profile itself shows warm tones suggests that Lucia ink on Canson Platine Fibre Rag is inherently warm even in the dark regions.

According to Red River Paper’s stock profile for its 75lb Arctic Polar Luster, that paper gives much cooler tones than Platine Rag does. I think I’ll get some and see how it goes.

Mrtomi:

• I’ve used Canson’s stock Platine Rag profile. It’s pretty good but the custom profile is better. More neutral and deeper blacks. Better tonal separation; therefore, better sharpness.
• Canon’s Professional Print & Layout does indeed work as a Photoshop plugin. I access it via the file menu.

X-Ray:

Like Chris Crawford, I was under the impression that for my working space I should use a device-independent profile—eg, gray gamma 2.2, or Adobe RGB (1998)—and save my device-dependent ICC printer profile for soft proofing and printing. I let Canon’s Professional Print & Layout convert the file for printing using my device-dependent custom ICC printer profile. I don’t convert the file beforehand in Photoshop.

 

[x-ray]

Adobe RGB is not a profile, it’s a color space that represents saturation and hue that is possible to preserve within that space. It doesn’t say that you will reproduce this gamut but say it’s possible to reproduce and capture these colors. It depends on your monitor and many factors as to whether you can even see that color space in its entirety much less reproduce it which is unlikely.

Gamma 2.2 or whatever you select is pretty much the contrast / brightness setting of your monitor.

I print from Photoshop for color and QTR for B&W. On occasion I use a dedicated RIP software to print smaller prints and contact sheets.

My monitor is calibrated using a calibration device and I use that calibration exclusively when editing and preparing files to print. When printing from Photoshop I select “let photoshop determine color”, perceptual intent and use the the ICC profile for the paper and ink and never have a problem. One of my most used papers is Canson Arches Platine, beautiful paper.

If you’re seeing different colors indifferent light sources that is common with some ink / paper combinations. Google metamerism and how it applies to photography. Not all light sources are created equal. Color spectrums vary a great deal between tungsten, different types of LED, CFI, fluorescent, daylight and discharge lights.

In the old days not so long ago when we used high quality color labs color evaluation was done under special 5000k full spectrum lights. That was the standard that we all worked with. Now, although viewing standards exist they’re pretty much ignored. In those days we also had fewer kinds of light sources that had better color rendering, except some types of fluorescent.

If you’re having color mismatch then there are RIP softwares available but they are expensive. RIP software adjust the printing to minimize color shift under different light sources Along with other things it does like maximizing layout of smaller prints on a larger sheet of paper.

Just a suggestion for a starting point.

 

[Andprayforrain]

Canson Arches Platine

Thanks again, x-ray.

Can't find that one. What's the exact name?

 

[x-ray]

It’s a Canson product and the name changed to Platine Fiber Rag. It’s designed to look like an air dried fiber base gelatin silver photographic print. I’m printing on old stock and assume it hasn’t been changed other than the name.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Thanks, all, for your replies.

I should point out that I don’t know for certain what the problem is. It may be simple colour inconsistency—eg, Lucia ink on Canson Platine Fibre Rag gives a brown cast at night under incandescent and LED lighting.

But I do have a print on Epson Exhibition Fibre that is inherently more neutral, not only during the day under diffuse daylight but also at night. Maybe Epson ink on Exhibition Fibre gives better colour consistency.

My general workflow with a black and white digital negative (DNG):

• Open the DNG in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR).
  • It’s a monochrome file, so no colour cast.
• After making the basic common adjustments, I open the file in Photoshop for selective editing.
  • ACR creates a 16-bit TIFF file and assigns the gray gamma 2.2 profile.
• After editing the file, I create a flattened copy for printing.
  • Like Zeitz, I ensure that my print settings everywhere are consistent.
    • I access printer preferences via a) the Windows printer settings in control panel and b) the printer settings in Photoshop’s print program (ctrl+p). I ensure Photoshop provides no colour management.
• I print using Canon’s Professional Print & Layout and let that software manage colours: relative colorimetric, custom ICC printer profile.

Without soft proofing, my calibrated monitor shows image grays that agree with Photoshop’s background grays. With soft proofing on, the image grays are noticeably warmer than Photoshop’s background grays, and they agree with my print grays. It seems the custom ICC profile is accurate. The fact that the profile itself shows warm tones suggests that Lucia ink on Canson Platine Fibre Rag is inherently warm even in the dark regions.

According to Red River Paper’s stock profile for its 75lb Arctic Polar Luster, that paper gives much cooler tones than Platine Rag does. I think I’ll get some and see how it goes.

Mrtomi:

• I’ve used Canson’s stock Platine Rag profile. It’s pretty good but the custom profile is better. More neutral and deeper blacks. Better tonal separation; therefore, better sharpness.
• Canon’s Professional Print & Layout does indeed work as a Photoshop plugin. I access it via the file menu.

X-Ray:

Like Chris Crawford, I was under the impression that for my working space I should use a device-independent profile—eg, gray gamma 2.2, or Adobe RGB (1998)—and save my device-dependent ICC printer profile for soft proofing and printing. I let Canon’s Professional Print & Layout convert the file for printing using my device-dependent custom ICC printer profile. I don’t convert the file beforehand in Photoshop.

I didn't realize that you were trying to print black & white images. The truth is that color profiles don't work well for B&W, it is nearly impossible to get truly neutral B&W images printing with color inks and ICC profiles.

Epson has a dedicated B&W mode for their printers, called Advanced B&W that produces neutral print tones across the entire tone range from white to black. It also allows you to choose to make your prints with a tone, like warm or sepia, that is also consistently the same across the while tone range. ICC profiles used to print B&W image almost never give neutral results, and worse the 'color' of the grays usually varies at different tones (meaning light tones will be a different color than dark tones).

Epson's system doesn't help you when you use a Canon printer, though. Canon does have a dedicated B&W photo mode on some of their printers. If they do, try it. You'll likely see your problems solved quickly.

 

[Andprayforrain]

ICC profiles used to print B&W image almost never give neutral results, and worse the 'color' of the grays usually varies at different tones (meaning light tones will be a different color than dark tones).

Boom.

That's what I find when looking at my BW prints.

Yes, Canon does have a BW mode, and yes it does give pretty good neutrality. But when I print using a custom ICC profile, I do get snappier prints--ie, better macro contrast for ovall punch, and better micro contrast for sharper details--even with the variable color cast you refer to, and I see. But that's no real problem: there's no soft-proofing in the darkroom; master printers can look at first prints and use thier printer's eyes to determine what to do next.

 

[Chriscrawfordphoto]

Boom.

That's what I find when looking at my BW prints.

Yes, Canon does have a BW mode, and yes it does give pretty good neutrality. But when I print using a custom ICC profile, I do get snappier prints--ie, better macro contrast for ovall punch, and better micro contrast for sharper details--even with the variable color cast you refer to, and I see. But that's no real problem: there's no soft-proofing in the darkroom; master printers can look at first prints and use thier printer's eyes to determine what to do next.

If your images lack contrast, increase it in photoshop or whatever editing software you use. If they don't look sharp enough/lack microcontrast, then sharpen them before you print them. Output sharpening is done after resizing the image to the final print size, right before printing. It is done with the Unsharp Mask filter in Photoshop. Alternatively, there are sharpening plugins you can get for output sharpening that work well, giving the correct amount of sharpening without you having to think about it much. The Nik sharpening plugin is my favorite for this, but others work well. If you print from Lightroom, it has the built-in ability to apply output sharpening calculated from the size and resolution of your print and the type of paper used.

Generally prints on matte or textured fine art papers need more output sharpening than prints on glossy or semigloss type papers.

The book Real World Image Sharpening is an excellent read if you're interested in this. It talks about initial sharpening of the raw capture, sharpening for contrast control, and output sharpening with recommendations for settings to use.

Don't choose to use ICC profiles for B&W printing just because of sharpening and contrast; you can control those in editing. Use Canon's B&W mode; it really is superior in every way to printing B&W using color ICC profiles.

 

[x-ray]

The proper way to prepare a file is to make it look its best in photoshop. You should not make adjustments in photoshop to compensate for problems downstream like mismatch of profile, ink and paper. The reason you don’t compensate in photoshop is you’re working outside the calibrated standard. For example you send that file out to a lab to be printed and you’ll have no idea how it’ll look because you’ve make adjustments to correct for your printer, profile and ink mismatch. This is why you calibrate and use icc profiles. You use the appropriate settings in your printing app like QTR to make those corrections.

There are applications like Image Print Rip, Quad Tone Rip and Queimage to print from. QTR and Queimage are inexpensive and very good. QTR is exclusively for B&W and probably the best software for B&W out there. It’s very involved and not sure if it works with canon but worth a look. I’ve used QTR with my Epson wide format machine since it came out and had great results.

 

[mrtoml]

Also don't forget the pattern print mode for the Canon pro 1000 if you use the BW mode. It is very useful for dialling in contrast and toning adjustments for various papers which can be saved for later use.