Lightroom vs Photoshop when printing.

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

But you still can't actually tell us what they have in common.

i did.

prove they're different. you can't.

nospam wrote:
In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

Alternatively, what do PS and LR have in common?

quite a bit.

You mean you don't really know?

it is blatantly obvious that two apps with overlapping feature sets
and which interoperate with each other, both from the same company,
will have shared code, camera raw being the obvious one, as well as
shared algorithms (where the languages differ).

Yep, you mean you don't really know!

--
Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 22:56:47 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

But you still can't actually tell us what they have in common.

i did.

Bull****!

prove they're different. you can't.

Tell us where they are the same. You can't.

This exchange is not worth continuing.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

In article , Eric Stevens
wrote:

prove they're different. you can't.

Tell us where they are the same. You can't.

did.

This exchange is not worth continuing.

yep.

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:34:48 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

--- snip ---

Eraly on, I did touch them, but all they did was increase the
differences. I didn't touch them for the four prints.

OK! However, if you are going to use LR to produce your final prints
you might want to tweak those adjustments a tad, and for future
reference save that configuration as a preset.

Certainly, but I have been trying to establish where they are
different and I can't do that if I introduce differences of my own.

As to using "Perceptual" or "Relative", that need is going to be
determined by the character of the print and your intent.

Which is why I now think that no firm advice should be given as to
which one is the correct one to use.

Color spaces: with LR, the working color space is Melissa RGB. This is
basicly ProPhoto with a special gamma curve.

Why? I use straight out of the package ProPhoto RGB.

You use ProPhoto. LR uses Melissa. There is obviously a conversion
involved. Re Melissa, see
http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/imprint_downloads/peachpit/peachpit/lightroom4/pdf_files/LightroomRGB_Space.pdf

or http://tinyurl.com/lk2jmlh

That was interesting information, of which I was previously ignorant. I
have not read anywhere else that there was a different variety of
ProPhoto RGD specifically for use by LR.

Ah ha!

Whatever it is, it was
converted to Epson's Pro38 PGPP for printing.

...and another colorspace change? To what purpose?
I can see assigning the appropriate icc profile, but changing color
space twice in midstream is something else.

Converted to Pro38 PGPP because that is the profile for the Pro 3800
printer using Premium Glossy Photo Paper.

So, Epson Pro38 PGPP isn't an obscure colorspace, but a paper/printer
profile. The way you phrased that sentence above led me to believe that
it was a another colorspace, since adding a profile to the mix, doesn't
change/convert the colorspace. It is not an Epson profile I am familiar
with.

Agreed, but it is certainly a conversion.

In PS, it was ProPhoto RGB converted to sRGB (for screen). I wonder if
this difference is enough to explain my print results?

If you are going to demand consistent print renditions the least you
could do is be consistent with colorspace , paper, and icc profile. So
the print settings were not the same for LR, or PS.

Now that sounds as if that is your LR - PS inconsistency.

I have no control over this: it's LR and PS which require these
things. I have some more thoughts. I will see what happens and report
back.

I wouldn't have gone from ProPhoto RGB in PS to sRGB, regardless if it
was for screen. These days I do very little printing from PS as all the
finished work ends up back in LR as a TIFF, or PSD retaining the
ProPhoto RGB colorspace. All prints are made from those, or virtual
copies of LR adjusted RAW files.
I only create JPEGs in sRGB when I export for sharing using the LR
export dialog.

--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2015-03-25 03:44:05 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:34:48 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

--- snip ---

Eraly on, I did touch them, but all they did was increase the
differences. I didn't touch them for the four prints.

OK! However, if you are going to use LR to produce your final prints
you might want to tweak those adjustments a tad, and for future
reference save that configuration as a preset.

Certainly, but I have been trying to establish where they are
different and I can't do that if I introduce differences of my own.

The problem is you are trying to compare the print output, and there
are obviously some differences, whether thay are due to your settings
or the individual processes of each program. Personnally I would try to
establish a print workflow you are comfortable and satiffied with and
stick to it. Second guessing is just going to lead to confusion and
dissatisfaction.

As to using "Perceptual" or "Relative", that need is going to be
determined by the character of the print and your intent.

Which is why I now think that no firm advice should be given as to
which one is the correct one to use.

Color spaces: with LR, the working color space is Melissa RGB. This is
basicly ProPhoto with a special gamma curve.

Why? I use straight out of the package ProPhoto RGB.

You use ProPhoto. LR uses Melissa. There is obviously a conversion
involved. Re Melissa, see
http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/imprint_downloads/peachpit/peachpit/lightroom4/pdf_files/LightroomRGB_Space.pdf


or http://tinyurl.com/lk2jmlh

That was interesting information, of which I was previously ignorant. I
have not read anywhere else that there was a different variety of
ProPhoto RGD specifically for use by LR.

Ah ha!

I have never claimed to know all, but I am quite comfortable in the
LR-PS workflow environment.

Whatever it is, it was
converted to Epson's Pro38 PGPP for printing.

...and another colorspace change? To what purpose?
I can see assigning the appropriate icc profile, but changing color
space twice in midstream is something else.

Converted to Pro38 PGPP because that is the profile for the Pro 3800
printer using Premium Glossy Photo Paper.

So, Epson Pro38 PGPP isn't an obscure colorspace, but a paper/printer
profile. The way you phrased that sentence above led me to believe that
it was a another colorspace, since adding a profile to the mix, doesn't
change/convert the colorspace. It is not an Epson profile I am familiar
with.

Agreed, but it is certainly a conversion.

That is debatable.
The Colorspace should remain constant. However, you have two different
gamuts with the LR ProPhoto RGB and the PS sRGB. Adding the profile to
the print dialog shouldnt convert anything and the change shouls be
consistent for all four prints since you are using the same paper &
printer combo.
I currently use RedRiver Paper of various types so whether I print
using PS or LR the Colorspace remains ProPhoto RGB, and the icc
profiles supplied by RedRiver are most commonly: RR PolPearlMetallic
EpR2880; RR Polar Matte EpR2880; RR PremiumGlossPLUS EpR2880; RR
UPGloss EpR2880.
Then I have profiles for Epson papers which look nothing like the one
you used; SPR2880 Ultra Premium Presentation Matte; SPR2880 Premium
Semigloss, SPR2880 Photo Paper Glossy, etc.

Add to those a completely different set of Epson profiles for my Epson
all-in-one XP610 which is my general use printer/scanner, and
occasional snapshot printer.

In PS, it was ProPhoto RGB converted to sRGB (for screen). I wonder if
this difference is enough to explain my print results?

If you are going to demand consistent print renditions the least you
could do is be consistent with colorspace , paper, and icc profile. So
the print settings were not the same for LR, or PS.

Now that sounds as if that is your LR - PS inconsistency.

I have no control over this: it's LR and PS which require these
things. I have some more thoughts. I will see what happens and report
back.

I wouldn't have gone from ProPhoto RGB in PS to sRGB, regardless if it
was for screen. These days I do very little printing from PS as all the
finished work ends up back in LR as a TIFF, or PSD retaining the
ProPhoto RGB colorspace. All prints are made from those, or virtual
copies of LR adjusted RAW files.
I only create JPEGs in sRGB when I export for sharing using the LR
export dialog.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:21:09 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-03-25 03:44:05 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:34:48 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

--- snip ---

Eraly on, I did touch them, but all they did was increase the
differences. I didn't touch them for the four prints.

OK! However, if you are going to use LR to produce your final prints
you might want to tweak those adjustments a tad, and for future
reference save that configuration as a preset.

Certainly, but I have been trying to establish where they are
different and I can't do that if I introduce differences of my own.

The problem is you are trying to compare the print output, and there
are obviously some differences, whether thay are due to your settings
or the individual processes of each program. Personnally I would try to
establish a print workflow you are comfortable and satiffied with and
stick to it. Second guessing is just going to lead to confusion and
dissatisfaction.

As far as I am concerned the print is the final objective.

You are jumping ahead of me. I wanted to first establish whether or
not there were obvious differences apart from those introduced by by
the respective settings. I am now reasonably sure that there are such
differences but I am by no means absolutely certain. As far as work
flows are concerned, I am trying to establish the inherent
characteristics of both PS and LR respectively. I don't know where
'second guessing' comes into it: I'm merely trying to understand my
tools.

As to using "Perceptual" or "Relative", that need is going to be
determined by the character of the print and your intent.

Which is why I now think that no firm advice should be given as to
which one is the correct one to use.

Color spaces: with LR, the working color space is Melissa RGB. This is
basicly ProPhoto with a special gamma curve.

Why? I use straight out of the package ProPhoto RGB.

You use ProPhoto. LR uses Melissa. There is obviously a conversion
involved. Re Melissa, see
http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/imprint_downloads/peachpit/peachpit/lightroom4/pdf_files/LightroomRGB_Space.pdf


or http://tinyurl.com/lk2jmlh

That was interesting information, of which I was previously ignorant. I
have not read anywhere else that there was a different variety of
ProPhoto RGD specifically for use by LR.

Ah ha!

I have never claimed to know all, but I am quite comfortable in the
LR-PS workflow environment.

Whatever it is, it was
converted to Epson's Pro38 PGPP for printing.

...and another colorspace change? To what purpose?
I can see assigning the appropriate icc profile, but changing color
space twice in midstream is something else.

Converted to Pro38 PGPP because that is the profile for the Pro 3800
printer using Premium Glossy Photo Paper.

So, Epson Pro38 PGPP isn't an obscure colorspace, but a paper/printer
profile. The way you phrased that sentence above led me to believe that
it was a another colorspace, since adding a profile to the mix, doesn't
change/convert the colorspace. It is not an Epson profile I am familiar
with.

Agreed, but it is certainly a conversion.

That is debatable.
The Colorspace should remain constant.

But it doesn't. See the second diagram in
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/help/color-management.html

However, you have two different
gamuts with the LR ProPhoto RGB and the PS sRGB. Adding the profile to
the print dialog shouldnt convert anything and the change shouls be
consistent for all four prints since you are using the same paper &
printer combo.

Then why are the prints different? That is my question. I don't know
yet but I hope to find out.

I currently use RedRiver Paper of various types so whether I print
using PS or LR the Colorspace remains ProPhoto RGB, and the icc
profiles supplied by RedRiver are most commonly: RR PolPearlMetallic
EpR2880; RR Polar Matte EpR2880; RR PremiumGlossPLUS EpR2880; RR
UPGloss EpR2880.
Then I have profiles for Epson papers which look nothing like the one
you used; SPR2880 Ultra Premium Presentation Matte; SPR2880 Premium
Semigloss, SPR2880 Photo Paper Glossy, etc.

Add to those a completely different set of Epson profiles for my Epson
all-in-one XP610 which is my general use printer/scanner, and
occasional snapshot printer.

In PS, it was ProPhoto RGB converted to sRGB (for screen). I wonder if
this difference is enough to explain my print results?

If you are going to demand consistent print renditions the least you
could do is be consistent with colorspace , paper, and icc profile. So
the print settings were not the same for LR, or PS.

Now that sounds as if that is your LR - PS inconsistency.

I have no control over this: it's LR and PS which require these
things. I have some more thoughts. I will see what happens and report
back.

I wouldn't have gone from ProPhoto RGB in PS to sRGB, regardless if it
was for screen. These days I do very little printing from PS as all the
finished work ends up back in LR as a TIFF, or PSD retaining the
ProPhoto RGB colorspace. All prints are made from those, or virtual
copies of LR adjusted RAW files.
I only create JPEGs in sRGB when I export for sharing using the LR
export dialog.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On 2015-03-25 08:28:26 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:21:09 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

On 2015-03-25 03:44:05 +0000, Eric Stevens said:

On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 19:34:48 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

--- snip ---

Eraly on, I did touch them, but all they did was increase the
differences. I didn't touch them for the four prints.

OK! However, if you are going to use LR to produce your final prints
you might want to tweak those adjustments a tad, and for future
reference save that configuration as a preset.

Certainly, but I have been trying to establish where they are
different and I can't do that if I introduce differences of my own.

The problem is you are trying to compare the print output, and there
are obviously some differences, whether thay are due to your settings
or the individual processes of each program. Personnally I would try to
establish a print workflow you are comfortable and satiffied with and
stick to it. Second guessing is just going to lead to confusion and
dissatisfaction.

As far as I am concerned the print is the final objective.

OK! For those images I actually deem interesting enough to print.

You are jumping ahead of me. I wanted to first establish whether or
not there were obvious differences apart from those introduced by by
the respective settings. I am now reasonably sure that there are such
differences but I am by no means absolutely certain. As far as work
flows are concerned, I am trying to establish the inherent
characteristics of both PS and LR respectively. I don't know where
'second guessing' comes into it: I'm merely trying to understand my
tools.

OK!

As to using "Perceptual" or "Relative", that need is going to be
determined by the character of the print and your intent.

Which is why I now think that no firm advice should be given as to
which one is the correct one to use.

Color spaces: with LR, the working color space is Melissa RGB. This is
basicly ProPhoto with a special gamma curve.

Why? I use straight out of the package ProPhoto RGB.

You use ProPhoto. LR uses Melissa. There is obviously a conversion
involved. Re Melissa, see
http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/imprint_downloads/peachpit/peachpit/lightroom4/pdf_files/LightroomRGB_Space.pdf



or http://tinyurl.com/lk2jmlh

That was interesting information, of which I was previously ignorant. I
have not read anywhere else that there was a different variety of
ProPhoto RGD specifically for use by LR.

Ah ha!

I have never claimed to know all, but I am quite comfortable in the
LR-PS workflow environment.

Whatever it is, it was
converted to Epson's Pro38 PGPP for printing.

...and another colorspace change? To what purpose?
I can see assigning the appropriate icc profile, but changing color
space twice in midstream is something else.

Converted to Pro38 PGPP because that is the profile for the Pro 3800
printer using Premium Glossy Photo Paper.

So, Epson Pro38 PGPP isn't an obscure colorspace, but a paper/printer
profile. The way you phrased that sentence above led me to believe that
it was a another colorspace, since adding a profile to the mix, doesn't
change/convert the colorspace. It is not an Epson profile I am familiar
with.

Agreed, but it is certainly a conversion.

That is debatable.
The Colorspace should remain constant.

But it doesn't. See the second diagram in
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/help/color-management.html

However, you have two different
gamuts with the LR ProPhoto RGB and the PS sRGB. Adding the profile to
the print dialog shouldnt convert anything and the change shouls be
consistent for all four prints since you are using the same paper &
printer combo.

Then why are the prints different? That is my question. I don't know
yet but I hope to find out.

There is a visible difference berween ProPhoto RGB and sRGB, I can see
the change happen when I convert to the narrower gamut. They are not
the same. The icc print profile is being applied to a different gamut.

I currently use RedRiver Paper of various types so whether I print
using PS or LR the Colorspace remains ProPhoto RGB, and the icc
profiles supplied by RedRiver are most commonly: RR PolPearlMetallic
EpR2880; RR Polar Matte EpR2880; RR PremiumGlossPLUS EpR2880; RR
UPGloss EpR2880.
Then I have profiles for Epson papers which look nothing like the one
you used; SPR2880 Ultra Premium Presentation Matte; SPR2880 Premium
Semigloss, SPR2880 Photo Paper Glossy, etc.

Add to those a completely different set of Epson profiles for my Epson
all-in-one XP610 which is my general use printer/scanner, and
occasional snapshot printer.

In PS, it was ProPhoto RGB converted to sRGB (for screen). I wonder if
this difference is enough to explain my print results?

If you are going to demand consistent print renditions the least you
could do is be consistent with colorspace , paper, and icc profile. So
the print settings were not the same for LR, or PS.

Now that sounds as if that is your LR - PS inconsistency.

I have no control over this: it's LR and PS which require these
things. I have some more thoughts. I will see what happens and report
back.

I wouldn't have gone from ProPhoto RGB in PS to sRGB, regardless if it
was for screen. These days I do very little printing from PS as all the
finished work ends up back in LR as a TIFF, or PSD retaining the
ProPhoto RGB colorspace. All prints are made from those, or virtual
copies of LR adjusted RAW files.
I only create JPEGs in sRGB when I export for sharing using the LR
export dialog.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

On Mon, 23 Mar 2015 21:22:53 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

--- snip ---

Color spaces: with LR, the working color space is Melissa RGB. This is
basicly ProPhoto with a special gamma curve.

Why? I use straight out of the package ProPhoto RGB.

Whatever it is, it was
converted to Epson's Pro38 PGPP for printing.

...and another colorspace change? To what purpose?
I can see assigning the appropriate icc profile, but changing color
space twice in midstream is something else.

It's actually the device dependent color space/profile of the Epson
3800 with Premium Glossy Photo Paper. When I switch the LR display to
Proof I have the option of sRGB, AdobeRGB and whatever the printer is
set for, in this case Pr38 PGPP.

--- more snip ---
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens

On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 04:33:11 -0700, Savageduck
wrote:

--- snip ---

Then why are the prints different? That is my question. I don't know
yet but I hope to find out.

There is a visible difference berween ProPhoto RGB and sRGB, I can see
the change happen when I convert to the narrower gamut. They are not
the same. The icc print profile is being applied to a different gamut.

And not surprisingly the results also depend on whether you choose
'perceptual' or 'relative colorimetric'. There is no hard and fast
rule to tell you which one is going to be best.

-- more snip ---
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens