# ColorFidelity Profiles for EOS R5 and Print Module Problems



## DimitriJPT (May 6, 2021)

Hello everyone,
I started using the ColorFidelity camera profiles for my EOS R5 a few months ago in Lightroom. I recently noticed that after applying the desired Colorfidelity profile upon import and making adjustments in the Develop module of Lightroom, when I switch over to the Print module the image looks very different than it does in the Develop module, as if the ColorFidelity profile has not been applied and instead only the standard Adobe camera profile has been applied. In the past, when using my 5D Mark III, that was also the case as the develop module likely tried to simulate the printer and paper, although now, I think the difference in the images is quite pronounced. It appears as though the ColorFidelity profile is not recognized by the Print module. Fortunately, the actual printed image looks fine, actually, better than fine. In contrast, when developing and printing an image from my 5D Mark III or the original EOS R, the image in the Develop and Print modules is quite similar, the main difference being the image changing based on the type of photo paper I use. Since I am not using the ColorFidelity profiles for those cameras, I assumed that there may be some interplay between the ColorFidelity profiles and the Print module. 

Has anyone else using the ColorFidelity camera profiles noticed this issue? If so, does anyone have any suggestions to correct it?

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------



## clee01l (May 6, 2021)

There are differences in how light appears between Display media (your monitor) and Print media. With Display media light pixels are transmitted. With Print media light is reflected off of each printed pixel. The perception of how the eye interprets reflected and transmitted light quite noticeable. 
The color that you see printed is determined by the ambient light, the ink application mechanisms of the printer and the type of ink used and finally the absorbing qualities of the paper (Glossy vs Matte and everything in between.) 
The Print module takes in to account the characteristics of the printer and paper being used. It does this best if the image has been adjusted using the soft proofing tool which attempts to imitate reflected light using a transmissive media. 

The intensity of the display media pixels varies from monitor to monitor and should only be trusted if the monitor has been calibrated and is constantly adjusted to account for the ambient light. 

In summary, you need to have a calibrated monitor such that the true colors recorded by your camera are displayed as the same true colors on your display. Second, you need to soft proof the image to match the characteristics of the printer and paper so that what you see on the screen will resemble what you see on the paper print. The Print module will always display different color characteristics because it is trying to accommodate the limitations of reflected media over transmitted media. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 7, 2021)

Hello Cletus,
I understand and agree with what you are saying, however, the issue i am having is somewhat different. I have been using the ColorFidelity camera profiles for my R5 in lieu of the LR provided camera profiles. Once the profile is applied upon import, I do y changes and the image looks good (to me), then I move to the Print module.

In the past with the EOS R or the 5D Mark III, the image in the Print module looked ever so slightly different from the image in the Develop modules, for all the reasons you cite.

Now, with the ColorFidelity profiles, the image in the Print module looks as if the ColorFidelity camera profile has not even been applied, the change is that drastic. In contrast, when printing images from the R or the 5D Mark III, the camera profile effect "persists" in the Print module. I hope this makes sense.

It is as if, somehow, the impact of the ColorFidelity camera profile does not carry over to the Print module, yet the changes In have made in the Develop module are all there.

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------



## clee01l (May 7, 2021)

DimitriJPT said:


> In the past with the EOS R or the 5D Mark III, the image in the Print module looked ever so slightly different from the image in the Develop modules, for all the reasons you cite.
> 
> Now, with the ColorFidelity profiles, the image in the Print module looks as if the ColorFidelity camera profile has not even been applied, the change is that drastic.


I don't see a change in the image at all when I open the Print module.  I have a secondary display showing the full size image and when I open the Print module that print image is displayed on the main display.  My  Print model setting s have an icc color profile set to manage the printer for the paper that I choose and so color is managed by Lightroom and not the printer.   My Nikon image uses the Camera Landscape V2 camera profile listed for that camera.  On the image that I chose for this response,  I did not soft proof the image in develop.  And I did not print the image to see how the print renders compared to the transmitted display view. 

Both my screens are color managed using an i1DisplayPro hardware and I am using MacOS 11.3 and LrC 10.2 on an iMac


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 7, 2021)

Hello Cletus,
What you are describing is consistent with what I am experiencing when I am  not using the ColorFidelity camera profiles for the R5. 

In this current situation, I think, the impact of the ColorFidelity profiles does not seem to transfer over to the Print module. These are camera profiles I purchased from a third party that try to emulate the effect of earlier camera profiles that Adobe used to provide in Lightroom for various Canon cameras. (i.e Camera Standard, Landscape, Portrait, etc)  I am not using the included camera profiles in LR. I will try to post some examples this evening.

As for a setup, I am using an iMac with LR Classic 10.2 and Mac OS 11.2.3. I have also calibrated the monitor with a Spyder Pro device. I too have the appropriate ICC profile for the paper used and color is indeed managed by LR and not the printer. My printer is an older Canon MG 6220 and I am using the profile for either the Platinum Pro paper or the Photo Paper Plus (a glossy paper from Canon). 

One last thing, the actual printed images are very close to the images in the Develop module.

Many thanks for following up, I really appreciate your comments.

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------



## clee01l (May 7, 2021)

I think I am beginning to understand your issue.  Color Fidelity profiles are a 3rd party camera profile add on.    I am guessing that there is a standard install location for all profiles and these might or might not be picked up automatically by the print module.  There may also be a nonstandard install location set up by the vendor that works in Develop but is not seen in the Print module.   So, there might be a bug in the Print module depending on how and where the 3rd party camera profiles are located wrt how Lightroom uses them in Develop and Print. 

With that said, I just went in over my head.    Perhaps someone like John Ellis might be able to address this.,


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 7, 2021)

Hello Cletus,
That is exactly the issue I am having and I think your hypothesis makes a lot of sense. As background, the developer of the camera profiles provided installation instructions which I followed. I assumed I did the installation correctly since I can see the effect of the ColorFidelity camera profiles in the Develop module. I am quite sure that the ColorFidelity camera profiles go into the the same folder as other camera profiles, I will confirm later  in the evening.

Maybe I should try to un-install and then re-install? I will ask the developer for instructions to un-install.

Forgive my ignorance, but who is John Ellis? Shall I try to reach out to him directly?

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------



## clee01l (May 7, 2021)

DimitriJPT said:


> Hello
> Maybe I should try to un-install and then re-install? I will ask the developer for instructions to un-install.
> 
> Forgive my ignorance, but who is John Ellis? Shall I try to reach out to him directly?…


John is one of the other gurus on the forum and should probably see this thread and respond. If he does not, then you can send him a PM here. 

If you can, then ask the developer. You might also ask them to verify that their Color Fidelity profiles have been tested to work in the Lightroom Print module. ACR and Lightroom Classic Develop are essentially the same engine but the Print module might be behaving differently. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 7, 2021)

Hello Cletus,
Thank you for bearing with me on this topic, I will take both of your pieces of advice and reach out to the ColorFidelity developer as well as John Ellis.

Enjoy your weekend,
Dimitri


----------



## Woodbutcher (May 7, 2021)

I'm a Canon R5 shooter too and use the Colorfidelity profiles.  I'll take a look this evening.  I've done some prints from the R5, but don't remember a difference in the view.  My monitors are calibrated too.


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 7, 2021)

Hello Rusty,
The way it happens is that I apply the camera profile upon import, edit in Develop module until I am happy with the image and then move to the Print module. For the first few moments, the image in the Print module appears consistent with the one in the Develop module. Then a few moments later it changes and while it looks like the edits I made are retained, the image overall appears as if the camera profile has not been applied.

Thank you for taking the time to respond to this issue. I will also send an email to ColorFidelity per Cletus' suggestion.

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------



## Woodbutcher (May 7, 2021)

thanks for the step to recreate.  that's my basic flow, to add profile on import.


----------



## johnrellis (May 7, 2021)

Adobe has acknowledged a bug with LR 10 on Mac OS 11 where the Print module doesn't faithfully reflect edits:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/conv...version-of-the-photo/5fc297e6ecf16939894a4edf
This may be tied to using the Zoom To Fill option in the Print module's Image Setting's panel on the right. 

I'm not able to reproduce that behavior with my LR 10.2 on Mac OS 11.3.1.  I haven't seen any other reports that 11.3.1 fixes this issue, but I have seen a couple reports that other problems related to graphics drivers were fixed by 11.3 or 11.3.1.  So it might be worth updating to it if you're on an earlier version of 11.

Please add details of your issue to that bug report, and be sure click Like and Follow below the top post. That will make it more likely Adobe will prioritize a fix and you'll be notified when they do.


----------



## johnrellis (May 8, 2021)

Oops, here's the correct link for the bug report:
https://feedback.photoshop.com/conv...version-of-the-photo/5fc297e6ecf16939894a4edf


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 8, 2021)

Hello John,
This is exactly what is causing the issues, I had the "Zoom to Fill" option enabled (for historical reasons) and disabling it resulted in LR behaving the way I was expecting.

I cannot thank you enough, this was driving me crazy and caused me to spend much time trying to find an answer. To be clear, the impact is only visual, the prints come out reflecting the camera profile applied and all the edits I have made.

John and Cletus and Rusty,
Many thanks to all of you for your help, I appreciate this immensely.

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------



## Woodbutcher (May 10, 2021)

DImitri, I just got around to testing this.  Sorry I forgot.  I tested before reading the comment about the issue and interesting, that is exactly what I figured out.  I had a 1x1 crop and it looked bad when I went into the Print module, but I was on a 8x10 print size and had FIt option.  When I switched t one of my templates with a 1x1 ratio, which matched the image, colors looked like develop module.  And by playing with settings, I narrowed it down to the Fit setting.


----------



## DimitriJPT (May 10, 2021)

Hello everyone,
I just wanted to close the loop and say that I too reported the issue to Adobe using the above link. In that discussion a user posted a series of images that accurately capture what I am seeing. At least I have a temporary solution for now, thank you John!

Can't wait for the weather to get better here in Long Island to start taking some pictures again, the flowers in our garden have bloomed and it is a great chance for some portrait pictures with the kids.

Kind regards,
Dimitri


----------

