Camera Raw: CMYK color space removed from the quick save option?

Andrew, i had to double-check for these options in ACR since i couldn't recall ever using them, but you definitely can assign and convert rgb to cmyk using both the Save and Workflow options in ACR. 

I also see no such CMYK profiles.

Thanks David, I'm currently running Camera Raw 11.2 and only have the options of 8 profiles which you will see in the screen grab above. I'm not sure where the other ones went or if there is a way to add more. I use to have the option to add all profiles I see in your menu there but the update seemed to take all of them away

It's working fine for me here... you might need to reinstall ACR or check the folder where all those profiles reside and make sure they're there... can you see them in Ps>Edit>Convert to Profile?

lovely, thanks.

Why is it in the Windows version? I was able to export a CMYK PSD with ACR 11.2 in testing.

Yeah, the APIs between OSes are different.  Now that we're aware of this problem, developers are looking into the issue for a resolution.

Thanks,
David

Thank you very much, yesterday I phoned your support. In the last two updates, the color space CMYK and many others are unfortunately no longer included (strangely supposedly in the US version already) ... I am now looking for an update in the function that still belongs. I simply need many "unedited photos" for the journal, whose photos were delivered in the CMYK color space. Now I have to load each single photo into PS CC and then convert it one by one. I am surprised that apparently nobody complained except me?

So please, dear team of Adobe PS CC Bridge CC and ACR CC, please the possibility of color choice back to the previously available options. The four or five now offered are absolutely not enough.

---

Hallo Klaus-Dieter,

CMYK sollte da sein.  Daß es fehlt  ist ein Fehler.  Ich habe dieses Bug schon eingemeldet.

Aber jetzt habe ich eine echte Frage -- brauchen Sie und benützen Sie alle diese andere Formatten?

Vielen Dank,
David

---

Howdy Klaus-Dieter,

CMYK should be there.  That it is missing is a mistake.  I have already logged this bug.

But that begs the question -- do you (ALL OF YOU READING THIS) actually need and use all of these other formats?

Thanks,
David

Copy/Pasting my replies from the other thread for visibility/continuity. :)
___

Hi David,

A lot of people use various ICC profiles and colorspaces for different purposes. 

In VFX, one might want to use DCI-P3, P3D65, P3D60, Rec.709, Rec.2020, Arri Wide Gamut, ACES AP0, ACES AP1, Sony S-Gamut, etc. All might have different blends of gamma/TRCs curves. Some being Linear (1.0), some with simple gamma curves (1.8, 2.2, 2.4, 2.6), some with more complex parametric tone curves(Rec.709, sRGB, L*), some with Logarithmic (Arri LogC, Cineon Log).

In print, one might want to use ECI-RGB with it's L* TRC/Gamma. Or use one of the newer V4 PRMG based sRGB profiles. Or they don't wish to open Photoshop itself or use image processor and wish to batch export into CMYK TIFFs. 

In photo editing, some people like to explore alternative workflows/methods. Some of which utilize different working spaces depending on the image. The way the color/tools/histogram/etc function in Photoshop are heavy influenced by the working space. For instance if i was working on an image where most of the image values are in the darker areas/ranges, I might choose to use a working space with a higher gamma number. Such as gamma 2.6 or gamma 3.0. This will distribute the tones more through the histogram/curves window/etc making it easier to work with. If it was a really bright image, I might use gamma 1.0 or 1.5. I know all this can be done manually with layers as well, however Photoshop isn't doing these operations in 32bit floating point. At some point when you do a bunch of gamma corrections on a 16bit (15+1bit) image, it starts to fall apart.  
___

Just to add, I'd like to see Photoshop/ACR/etc getting more modular and advanced with color. Not really less. 

Like instead of removing profiles, I'd love to see more support for ACES based workflows. And even OpenColorIO integration possibly.

If you look at what Davinci Resolve is doing, with Color Space Transforms and 32bit floating point processing, HSL masks/qualifiers, etc...

That's more where i'd like to see ACR/Photoshop headed. Not removing stuff and having less stuff. I think there can be ways to specify Simple vs. Advanced workflows if one is looking to simplify the UI/experience

100% agree with Cameron.
ACR needs much more advanced color workflow tools as well as a massive update to their Profile creation/management.

Live updating masks is a feature that was requested years ago that'd be really useful. https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/live_dynamic_masking Also combine that with HSL qualifiers/masks like in Resolve and you have a nice upgrade/alternative to the Blend If sliders.

Also I've always wanted a path based warp/puppet warp/liquify. As someone who's been doing retouching professionally for most of my life now, it's something that would speed up workflows for so many people. Especially for production teams. I posted this on reddit in a retouching thread. This would so much time with smoothing jacket zippers and other things. Also you'd be able to distort/warp things into more precise/symmetrical shapes. With smoother curves. 

imagine you were retouching a handbag and you want to warp/liquify an edge to a smooth shape. It would be really cool if you could essentially just trace it with the pen tool, essentially "clamp" that path to the image, then you can redo/modify/warp/smooth that path and it will distort/liquify/warp the image.

Lastly the holy grail for retouchers would be neural network/machine learning image segmentation. Which you guys are working on! :) :) It would be amazing though if a version could be made with parameters or something optimized for masking/clipping out product photos. Hundreds of thousands of images are sent to clipping path services just to make clean extractions from white, near white, or solid color backgrounds. Retouching services like Pixelz say they've utilized it to speed up their workflows. Also a company called Spektral was recently acquired by Apple for over $30m for this tech. They used to be called CloudCutout and it specialized in cutting out objects from studio backgrounds.

I know this area is difficult and thank you guys for all the hard work and research! I've read some of the Adobe research papers, they are amazing. It would be really cool to even have more alpha/beta, Adobe Research Labs, etc functions to test out. Maybe even newer ways of interacting/interfacing with image editing. I posted this a while back. It doesn't seem like it'd that fundamentally different in terms of image editing as color balance, hue/sat, etc It's just a different interface that might be easier, more intuitive, or more efficient for some. 

Cam, did you mean to have this be its own new feature request?

Why is this all in ACR? I'm not seeing where we need advanced exports there anyway. Its both duplication of effort and something else to go wrong.

It's been there before. They removed the option allowing people to select a color profile other than the 5 recommended ones.  Also it's been acknowledged as a bug. David (official rep) asked about need and use for them. I provided some. :) 

Some people process stills camera raws for use in VFX, alternative workflows, or any of the reasons I stated above.

The other stuff was just me ranting about general features to add to photoshop. :)

Howdy,

When I log a user-reported bug, I include a link to the original report, so that when management is triaging what to work on, they can hear the customer's own words.  To that end, explaining WHY a feature is important is really helpful -- it gives a sense of how much pain an issue is causing and to whom in which context.  So, feel free to share your stories about why these color spaces are important in your Camera Raw workflow.

For other issues, however, it would be good to have a separate thread with its own bug.  Otherwise, it all comes across as noise.

Hope that helps,
David

Hi David,

In my field, cultural heritage digitization, ECIv2 is one of the standard recommended color spaces. It is preferred and even required for some work flows.

https://www.metamorfoze.nl/sites/metamorfoze.nl/files/publicatie_documenten/Metamorfoze_Preservation_Imaging_Guidelines_1.0.pdf

http://www.digitizationguidelines.gov/guidelines/FADGI%20Federal%20%20Agencies%20Digital%20Guideline...

I've also used DCI/P3 for film digitization for transfer to video.

--David