# Exporting with ICC Profile for Online Lab Printing



## jsonnabend (Sep 22, 2010)

Sorry if this has been addressed before, I couldn't find anything when I searched.

I am trying to get good color matching when using an online lab for printing (in this case Adorama). I have a hardware calibrated monitor (using Spyder3) and I have downloaded the ICC profile for the printer from Adorama.

When I am ready to print, I export using Adorama's ICC profile for the printer I will be using. I order the prints without color correction. The prints I have received are not color accurate.

When I spoke with tech support from Adorama, I was informed that I cannot export from Lightroom using ICC profiles, only from PS. Is this true? How do I get good color matching from LR using online labs?

I am using LR3.2 on Windows XP.

TIA

- Jeff


----------



## Mark Sirota (Sep 22, 2010)

No, that's not true.

It may be that Adorama is providing the profile not to embed in the file, but to use for soft proofing -- and you can do that only in Photoshop, not in Lightroom. They may expect you to use that profile for soft proofing, but embed sRGB or Adobe RGB.


----------



## Graeme Brown (Sep 22, 2010)

You can use alternative .ICC profiles in Lightroom, simply choose from the drop down list in the Export dialog box under File Settings. However, I think you may be confusing soft proofing (where Photoshop can simulate onscreen the exact paper & printer) - Lightroom can't do this. 

Adorama's website says they accept only sRGB so that's what you should be using; provided your monitor is properly calibrated your prints should turn out fine


----------



## Brad Snyder (Sep 22, 2010)

What Adorama told you is not exactly true. The fact that the colors are wrong more or less disproves what they said.

However, their own print processing website, states that they want images in sRGB, and sRGB only. Therefore, the reason they provide ICC profiles for specific print combinations is to allow you to 'soft-proof', which is a way of estimating a print device's response to your file. Unfortunately, Lr does not currently implement this soft-proofing capability (insert wailing and gnashing of teeth), and you will need a program that does, typically Photoshop, if you want to try to take advantage of this feature.

I'd suggest trying a few sample prints exported from Lr in plain-vanilla sRGB, instead embedding the Adorama profile, again keeping their in-house color-correction turned off. 

In addition, almost all on-line labs work exactly this way.


Edit: Geez, multiple simul-posting


----------



## jsonnabend (Sep 22, 2010)

Thanks, guys, for the info. The tech rep said I should submit in sRGB. I hadn't seen it on the website. 

Follow up question(s): 

(1) if submitting in sRGB will lead to correct color, what's the point of soft proofing? Shouldn't it look the same?

(2) Assuming I submit in sRGB as indicated, should I have them do CC or not?

Thanks again.

- Jeff


----------



## Brad Snyder (Sep 22, 2010)

1) sRGB is the smallest of the common colorspaces. Lr (and optionally PS) works in a much larger space. This means you may have colors in your Lr file that aren't reproducible in what's called the sRGB 'gamut'. The problem is, they also may not be reproducible in your monitor, or differently so. Calibrating your monitor helps a bit with that. Soft-proofing is a best attempt to show you where the problem areas will be, to allow you to attempt to compensate for them. 

2) There's a lot of science, and a little bit of voodoo, and arcane lore in making all this gibe, because not everyone speaks exactly the same language at the same level of understanding. Many folks make a test suite of images, controlling the variables, sRGB, color-correction on/off, softproofing, and have them printed. Examine the results and make a decision. Rinse, lather, repeat for each new printer or lab. 

Unless you're doing huge art print landscapes of subtle sky blue /grass green vistas, or specific commercial product shots with trade named (e.g Caterpillar Yellow)color, I'd try sRGB, hand tuned in Lr, with no lab color-correction first. The more picky the work, the more picky the workflow.


----------



## Graeme Brown (Sep 22, 2010)

[quote author=jsonnabend link=topic=11112.msg74763#msg74763 date=1285176917]
(1) if submitting in sRGB will lead to correct color, what's the point of soft proofing? Shouldn't it look the same?[/quote]

Soft proofing shows the effect of the gamut, printer, paper etc - it's to give you an idea of the finished result. In reality it should look pretty similar on the screen to the final print, the differences are probably quite subtle.



> (2) Assuming I submit in sRGB as indicated, should I have them do CC or not?



Colour is very personal, your interpretation of how the image should look will be closer than someone who didn't shoot it and wasn't there. Assuming you're half-way competent at colour balancing, and you have a calibrated monitor) then best that you tell them not to monkey about with it.


----------



## Brad Snyder (Sep 22, 2010)

And if no one has said so, Welcome to the forums.


----------



## jsonnabend (Sep 22, 2010)

Thanks again, everyone. I am definitely beginning to appreciate that it's a trial and error approach. To top it all off (after using the wrong color space), my test print has some subtle colors and is a very low-key shot as well. Difficult print, no doubt.

(It's here, if you want to see it).

- Jeff


----------



## Brad Snyder (Sep 22, 2010)

Wow.

Have a look at this page: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml# 

A good introduction in general, but look at the bottom chart. Big mismatches occur in the lower left, dark blue corner, which may impact your dark (beautiful) sky. Lr also has had a history of weirdness with flame/sunset yellow orange as well, we've discussed it at length here, with no real conclusion that I'm aware of. 

You're right, this one may take a few iterations. As I've said many times before, in my event practice, clients don't care; Sky blue? check. Grass green? check. Done; so my life is a lot easier.


----------



## Graeme Brown (Sep 22, 2010)

[quote author=Brad Snyder link=topic=11112.msg74786#msg74786 date=1285185223]in my event practice, clients don't care; Sky blue? check. Grass green? check. Done; so my life is a lot easier.
[/quote]

I'm primarily a weddings guy, so it's: dress white? check. Skin sort of skin coloured? check. Done

Plus I'm in Scotland, so the sky - blue thing doesn't often apply :icon_mrgreen:


----------



## b_gossweiler (Sep 22, 2010)

[quote author=Graeme Brown link=topic=11112.msg748'1#msg748'1 date=128519'368]
...
Plus I'm in Scotland, so the sky - blue thing doesn't often apply :icon_mrgreen: 
[/quote]

If the sky looks blue, there must be a color cast on the photo  

Beat


----------

