[Painter 11] How do I get my blacks to be black again... color management?

[davi]

I'm having trouble getting the "true black" in my painter to even look more than 95% grey, it's creating a huge difference between a piece im painting in black and white in painter to when i post it on the web.

any help will be greatful!

[Arshes Nei]

Hi Davi,

I noticed that Helltroll had a similar issue:
http://www.conceptart.org/forums/showthread.php?t=151552

One thing is that you probably want to change your profile back to Adobe 1998

http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/862/p11colormanagement.jpg (http://img25.imageshack.us/my.php?image=p11colormanagement.jpg)
http://img25.imageshack.us/img25/p11colormanagement.jpg/1/w507.png (http://g.imageshack.us/img25/p11colormanagement.jpg/1/)

This is a screenshot of my settings.

The Color Management settings are under Canvas (at least in Windows)

[davi]

yah that seems to have fixed hte issue but ONLY when i start a new image, seems like this color management thing some how affixes it self to certain images :/

[Arshes Nei]

yah that seems to have fixed hte issue but ONLY when i start a new image, seems like this color management thing some how affixes it self to certain images :/

On the Rendering intent change it to Relative Colorimetric and see if that helps.

[m.c.miller]

I noticed this in the trial.

I would use the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 profile for work intended for display on screen/web. The profile that painter defaults to has no black point compensation. You want the one that looks exactly as I have typed not the ones that came with painter.

No - sRGB IEC61966-2-1 noBPC (gray black)
No - sRGB IEC61966-2-1 withBPC (who knows)
Yes - sRGB IEC61966-2.1 (the real deal) (the one above should be the same but play it safe)

The profile is attached to the file so you have to change the profile for existing images that were originally assigned sRGB IEC61966-2-1 noBPC. You can go under canvas and choose 'assign profile' to change the profile attached to an image. You should only assign sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in this case so your colors don't appear different other than the black point. Again, I would suggest the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 for your default profile since that will translate between screens when not using color management. If you use another profile meant for print work your image may not look the same for others when seen on the web for example. sRGB IEC61966-2.1 basically mimics no color management since it is the default color space for most screens and software.

I would love to hear an explanation for why painter defaults this way...

edit: Adobe RGB ( 1998 ) is for work intended for print. You can use this profile if you need to but I would convert to sRGB IEC61966-2.1 before saving a web version. If anyone just wants to not have to worry about this stuff choose sRGB IEC61966-2.1.

Also be careful with the difference between 'assign profile' and 'convert to profile'. Assign profile is non destructive even though it changes appearance, while convert to profile actually converts the image colors. Only convert when saving different versions from print to web for example. This can be confusing since assign profile can have more of a visual impact on colors since the color space is changing while the image stays the same, while converting the colors changes the image to appear similar in the new color space.

[Elsevilla]

I'm having trouble getting the "true black" in my painter to even look more than 95% grey, it's creating a huge difference between a piece im painting in black and white in painter to when i post it on the web.

any help will be greatful!


The color manager only serves for printed visualization, the cool way to disable it, its that you just need to click on a rainbow icon that its on top of a blue kinda star all to the top right side of painter, if you click on it to turn the icon black.

The color visualization preferences will shut down, that helps you to see the true rgb colors, so you can easily see black and white.


Had this trouble longtime ago, i couldnt believe the black out of the canvas were darker than a true 100% black.

That icon works the same as control plus y on photoshop, it only helps you to see the file as a cmyk with the options you used on color management.

Hope this info helps you out. Viva la painter.

[Arshes Nei]

edit: Adobe RGB ( 1998 ) is for work intended for print. You can use this profile if you need to but I would convert to sRGB IEC61966-2.1 before saving a web version. If anyone just wants to not have to worry about this stuff choose sRGB IEC61966-2.1.

Also be careful with the difference between 'assign profile' and 'convert to profile'. Assign profile is non destructive while convert to profile actually converts the image colors. Only convert when saving different versions from print to web for example. This can be confusing since assign profile can have more of a visual impact on colors since the color space is changing while the image stays the same, while converting the colors changes the image to appear similar in the new color space.

Yes. The reason I use the Adobe Profile is to keep color consistency between the two programs. I pretty much do not just save images in compressed format with Painter, I take it to Photoshop and match its profile.

[m.c.miller]

edit: this is for painter 11...you may be able to just turn off that icon in earlier versions depending on your settings.

edit 2: This may just be an issue in painter. These noBPC profiles look fine in photoshop. That makes sense because there is no difference in gamut between srgb and srgb (duh). I would still set up color management so it looks correct in painter just to be safe. Is everyone with this issue using Vista? It could be something with WCS and painter in Vista.

You can simply click the icon to disable the color managed view but it is important to remember that the color profile is attached to the image anyway.

So if you do not like the way the image looks with color management on, you cannot simply turn off the icon since the file will be saved as if the icon was on. If the image is viewed in a program that supports color management it will look the 'wrong' way again (assuming the issue is not just strangeness with the noBPC profile in Painter). The reason I suggest saving your web versions in srgb is because the image will look the same with or without color management since it is the standard color space for most hardware and software. If you use another color space then the image must be viewed color managed in order for it to look as intended. Color spaces like adobe rgb are simulated on screen and require the profile to be utilized in order to display correctly. You can never be sure a viewer is viewing the image color managed or not so srgb is safest for the web.

This can be hard to test since you may view the image outside of painter and think it looks fine...but that depends on if the software displaying the image is using the color profile or not. If you use adobe rgb and view the image outside of painter or photoshop and it looks correct...then the software is color managed...this can be misleading since you never see how the image appears without color management. If you disable the color managed view in painter because it looks wrong and the image appears the the way you want outside of painter then the viewing software is not color managed and you are falsely secure (this is other than the noBPC issue). This is why the safest way to post images on the web is in srgb. Assuming a monitor is decently calibrated, an srgb image should look correct (the same) with or without color management with the added benefit that it is properly profiled if someone ever needs to know the source color space.

You don't have to match profiles with photoshop's default. If you check ask when opening for profile mismatches in the color management settings in painter and photoshop you can work in the color space of any image should you choose to keep the source profile when opening. The important thing is what color space your final image is saved in since it is going out into the world of unknown viewing conditions.

Color profiles can cause more trouble than they are worth when it comes to images intended for screen display. A properly calibrated monitor is assumed to be srgb so an image with another color profile only serves to confuse the matter if it is intended for on screen viewing. These other profiles are meant to prepare the image for use in another color space such as for print. So if you have an adobe rgb image and the color profile is not utilized it will be assumed srgb. So by saving srgb you are correct either way.

So you might ask, if the image looks the same with or without an srgb profile what is the point? And that is the point. Color profiles are for use in moving images from one color space to another. Since we are all theoretically in the same color space on screen there is no need for this conversion. The difference between monitors is taken care of by calibration and that can only be done by each user...so at this point we should all be in srgb. So it is easiest to share images online without color profiles, but since high end software is often used to produce professional print work, profiles are needed to convert to these other color spaces. Since color management is always on in these programs we need to make the redundant choice of srgb if our work is intended for on screen/web viewing.

I hope I don't sound too crazy about this stuff, I just spent a lot of time reading about color management a while ago.

[FranciscoShreds]

Lol. That's awesome. I'm glad I'm not the only one that has all this wealth of color management knowledge that just needs to be spat at people. Just coming out of a really intense and awesome media color management class.

[m.c.miller]

For anyone dealing with changing color profiles:

Assigning profiles is done for images with no profile or for those that have the wrong profile.

Converting profiles is done when you want to keep the image looking the same but want it in another color space (profile).

So if you have an adobe rgb image that you want to post online as srgb you need to convert that before saving the web version.

Assigning a profile to an image that is in another color space will change the appearance of the image. A profile tells how to interpret the image so assigning only changes how the image is displayed, while converting changes the actual image to a new color space.

This all comes together if you want to do something like open a non color managed image in photoshop and work in adobe rgb. You would open the image and assign it srgb (or whatever you know the source space was) and then convert to adobe rgb.

Lol. That's awesome. I'm glad I'm not the only one that has all this wealth of color management knowledge that just needs to be spat at people. Just coming out of a really intense and awesome media color management class.

I just got really bothered by not knowing why images changed appearance for seemingly no reason in different software...so I did a lot of searching and reading. Even if you understand color management you have to be very careful in explaining it in order to be clear...there are so many places to go wrong.

[teho]

yah that seems to have fixed hte issue but ONLY when i start a new image, seems like this color management thing some how affixes it self to certain images :/

I have the same problem. For example, I worked with default color management profile sRGB IEC61966-2-1 noBPC, but when I selected the same color space as in photoshop sRGB IEC61966-2.1 in color management in painter, it was not affected to the image... So nothing changed, the darks still are looking grey, but must be darker... So painter is embedding that sRGB IEC61966-2-1 noBPC profile to the image (you can see that when open that image in photoshop and check 'convert to profile' and see 'source space'). So as I understood, if you already created the image in that 'grey' default profile, changing the profile in Painter to the normal srgb IEC61966-2.1, is NOT affecting to the image. That grey profile is still embedd to the image. You must go to the photoshop and manually convert to normal srgb IEC61966-2.1, then open the file back in Painter.

p.s.: I think we must to create F.A.Q. for Painter 11 and stick it...

[PaintBoxer]

I have created my images exclusively for fine art printing and have saved them in Fraser 1998, one of the choices in Painter 10 that gave me excellent results. It does not seem to be available in Painter11. Adobe RGB1998, which has been the go to space for photography print did not work well for me when printing Painter images. sRGB is the color space of the Web if I understand correctly. All my devices are calibrated including building my own paper profiles via spectrophotometer. So besides starting from scratch, proofing etc. I'm at a loss for how to proceed in Painter11. Any help greatly appreciated.

[rattsang]

I have created my images exclusively for fine art printing and have saved them in Fraser 1998, one of the choices in Painter 10 that gave me excellent results. It does not seem to be available in Painter11. Adobe RGB1998, which has been the go to space for photography print did not work well for me when printing Painter images. sRGB is the color space of the Web if I understand correctly. All my devices are calibrated including building my own paper profiles via spectrophotometer. So besides starting from scratch, proofing etc. I'm at a loss for how to proceed in Painter11. Any help greatly appreciated.

try going back to painter x

[PaintBoxer]

I'm not sure why you bother to respond if you have no intent to help but instead give a silly statement

[rattsang]

I'm not sure why you bother to respond if you have no intent to help but instead give a silly statement

er.... ok in case you havent noticed painter 11 offers more bugs than features, my above statement is your only real option, read some more threads and you will see a pattern. the color management is inconsistent to say the least in painter 11. there are no solid solutions to this problem as of yet.

[PaintBoxer]

Well I have learned quite a bit about Painter Color Management talking to corel and others + reading. When choosing colorspaces in Painter 11 The choice sRGB wBPC means With Black Point Compensation. sRGB woBPC-You Know. wBPC is a reasonable choice for Web Destined images. A better space for Print Centric artists would be adobe1998 capturing richer color, however it is recommended to paint up a spectrum of color, Dark Blue thru Light/light Blue for instance, print that spectrum on your calibrated paper and system and find out for yourself what colors are printable or not. At first glance it appears the richer the color especially in Blues the more clipping and shifting. I think blue has a tendency to shift towards purple hues. A lot of Painter images I look at seem to have a purple tone. As for Painter not having good color management or not, I think it is up to the artist to dig deep and find what setting are actually doing and fine tune your software for best expressing your vision in your artwork.

[anjy]

In Photoshop CS4 (and possibly earlier, but it's not in CS2...), there is the convenient "Convert to sRGB" checkbox when saving for web, which will convert colors to sRGB, without having to manually convert them prior to export.

Aaabout Painter... I know this thread is about version 11, but I'm using version 9, and this desaturated colors bug is present, which someone might want to test in version 11. One thing I noticed is that if I export a JPEG from PS and open it in Painter, it will actually render the colors properly. It seems PSD layered files are desaturated. Dropping all layers (flattening) seems to preserve the Painter appearance in the file. Annoying as hell, wtf.

[teho]

PaintBoxer, did you asked about the actual difference between sRGB wBPC and simple sRGB? Or they are the same?

[SHAP00PI]

its that you just need to click on a rainbow icon that its on top of a blue kinda star all to the top right side of painter, if you click on it to turn the icon black.

That fixed it for me, thanks a bunch!