Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family

44 Messages

 • 

3.1K Points

Mon, Jan 16, 2012 6:50 AM

Under consideration

34

Lightroom: CMYK softproofing needed

Following a discussion on the LR4 beta forum:

Converting to CMYK and soft proofing in CMYK are two completely different things, so at least we need a CMYK softproofing.

During the last years I ran into a lot of problems due to modern LED lightning on the scene, it is able to produce colors (especially in the blues) far away out of the CMYK color space. Converting pictures to CMYK later after my initial processing can change a picture dramatically, a bit similar to a conversion to b/w.

So even if you have to deliver your material in RGB and someone else is doing a professional conversion later, you should be able to predict what can happen to your material!

So if you deliver material that will be converted – earlier or later – to CMYK: You need at least a simple soft proof. Otherwise it can happen that you deliver material that simply can’t be published.

Responses

76 Messages

 • 

1.9K Points

9 years ago

With you here, even though 97% the printing that my work gets done is RGB

1.6K Messages

 • 

20.4K Points

9 years ago

Considering LR is a fully RGB processing path, it can’t convert to CMYK, what would be the point of soft proofing CMYK? You can (and should) do both in Photoshop.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

44 Messages

 • 

3.1K Points

9 years ago

I'm here with two copies of PS. I work a lot with LR every day with tons of pictures. And I ended up with using PS may be once a year. Adobe will not motivate me to buy a third copy by moving features from LR to PS.

Using PS just for proofing purposes is like hiring a submarine when you want to go fishing. It's no practical workflow! Move a slider in LR, export to PS, look at the picture, go back to LR, move another slider, export again, look at it in PS - one gets crazy. And thats dangerous because you start selling and distributing material thats not working well for any purposes other than being printed at home or put on a website.

So if one thinks he needs no CMYK proof within LR, he should

- never use LRs book feature
- not sell any pictures to agencies, newspapers etc. because you never know how you material will behave

etc.

1.6K Messages

 • 

20.4K Points

9 years ago

What part of “LR has an RGB processing path” wasn’t clear? You’d be willing to have LR develop a big, ugly set of CMYK preferences as we have in Photoshop, only to soft proof and not convert the data?

You have two copies of PS, one more than you need to soft proof and convert.

What’s next, pop Illustrator or InDesign into LR?

The book feature isn’t going to fly here because there are no actual CMYK profiles for it to use (just one generic profile that doesn’t define the print process). Even if you could load the generic Blurb profile for an LR soft proof, what you were viewing would be incorrect. So that we have a book module, at least for this one provider doesn’t justify CMYK anything. If you can get Blurb to provide all the ICC output profiles for all CMYK processes, you’d be much closer to justify the ability to soft proof in Photoshop let alone LR.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

44 Messages

 • 

3.1K Points

9 years ago

Editing photos in LR and soft proofing in PS makes no sense, at least if one has to edit material on a daily basis. You need to see the results in real time. Like you would do it within PS: Simply switch on the proof and keep on editing while in proof view. So recommending PS for soft proofing makes only sense if you stop editing your material in LR. And I think LRs intention is to bee a bit more than just a "iPhoto from Adobe".

And we are not asking for rocket science, there is even a LR plug in for such purposes (http://www.lightroom-plugins.com/Proo.... It's at least a compromise between the optimum (of having the proof fully integrated within LR) and the worst case (of having to do it clunky in PS).

Adding this proofing feature would be a further, strong enhancement of the biggest LR advantage: It's perfect workflow integration.

Books: I never asked for this feature. But as far as I know there are a lot of book printers offering a good profile support, which may be better than blurbs, but I don't know that.

17 Messages

 • 

780 Points

9 years ago

I think CMYK softproofing is a good idea and validates that LR is an end-to-end workflow solution for professionals... one of LR's most important constituencies.

+1

1.6K Messages

 • 

20.4K Points

9 years ago

>I think CMYK softproofing is a good idea and validates that LR is an end-to-end workflow solution for professionals... one of LR's most important constituencies.

So you’d soft proof CMYK, knowing you can’t get CMYK out of LR?

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

1 Message

 • 

64 Points

Yes, I would. It's the back and forth between LR and PS that makes the workflow ridiculous.

17 Messages

 • 

780 Points

9 years ago

You really don't think it's necessary to challenge everyone who votes on this feature do you? Your position is understood, other people have other ideas.

1.6K Messages

 • 

20.4K Points

9 years ago

Challange? I asked a question which so far is unanswered about viewing CMYK in a product that has only an RGB processing path.

We can all vote that the moon should be made of cheese. That will not change it to cheese.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

17 Messages

 • 

780 Points

9 years ago

And it's going to remain unanswered as long as the antagonistic sophistry continues. You're just another user of the product.

3 Messages

 • 

126 Points

9 years ago

I have no idea about the processing path of LR4 but I think that CMYK soft-proofing would definitely improve my workflow.

Out of the 8 icc profiles I use 3 are CMYK.

513 Messages

 • 

11.1K Points

9 years ago

Seems that the only book vendor LR4 supports (Blurb) uses CMYK and that softproofing does not support CMYK.

The uninitiated would expect that the combined availability of "softproofing" + "book module" means that you can check how your images will look printed in a book.

I realise that Blurb would have to provide more profiles, depending on the paper used for a book, but that's just another problem to be solved, not an explanation as to why features in LR4 do not work together as one may expect.

1 Message

 • 

62 Points

9 years ago

Well, I print my images to an Epson with a rip (EFI Colorproof XF), after exporting them from Lightroom as Prophoto RGB. This rip uses CMYK output profiles. I would also like to softproof this output from Lightroom, based on these profiles.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

9 years ago

I have an HP Color Laserjet CP2025. It is a CMYK printer.
The output profiles generated for it by ColorMunki Photo are CMYK.
I would like to softproof output for this printer.

51 Messages

 • 

754 Points

9 years ago

I was going to install the LR4 Beta today until I understood that it doesn't offer simple CMYK softproofing which I wanted to use for checking my Blurb book submission ...