Lightroom Classic CC Print Module retains previous ICC profile

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 months ago
When you move into the Print module in Lightroom Classic CC, typically from the Develop module where you've been soft proofing, but sometimes from elsewhere when you're going back to an already proofed image for reprinting, the Print module has the previously used icc profile selected.

Most of the time, that's wrong.

When you bring an image into the Print module, it's usually been soft proofed already, so it _has_ an icc profile associated with it.  That profile should be loaded into the Color Management section of the Print Job panel.

The only exception I can think of is if you've got multiple images in the Print module and they don't all share the same icc profile, which should probably be flagged somehow anyway, if it's possible for that to happen.
Photo of Evan Robinson

Evan Robinson

  • 9 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
  • like it's good day...

Posted 6 months ago

  • 1
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 1456 Posts
  • 583 Reply Likes
I get the feeling that you don't understand what color management does. Your images don't have a print icc-profile associated to them. They are al in Lightroom's working color space, a special version of ProPhotoRGB. The printer icc-profile is only used to render the data that are sent to the printer. So you can't have "multiple images in the Print module and they don't all share the same icc profile, which should probably be flagged somehow anyway".

If you want to automatically come back to the correct printer profile, then save a custom print preset for these settings. That will not only remember the choice of printer icc-profile, but also things like page setup, kind of printer, print resolution, etc.
(Edited)
Photo of Evan Robinson

Evan Robinson

  • 9 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
Color space and color profiles are not the same thing. Briefly, a color space is a mathematical formula for how to describe a color within certain limits. A color profile is an instantiation of how a device expresses that formula, providing (for example, as a possibility) a recipe (e.g specific numeric values for a set of inks) to make an output device display each desired color.

And of course a proofed image has a color profile associated with it. Why do you think that LIghtroom added the profile name and rendering intent to the displayed name of the proofed image when you soft proof in the Develop module if not to “associate” the two?

Now, if your meaning is that there is no requirement that a proofed image be displayed in a specific profile, you are of course correct. If your meaning is to establish that there is not necessarily an output color profile embedded in the image to be used, duh. That would be incredibly inefficient. But if you’ll stop being condescending for a moment and think about a common workflow in which you process an image to one you find aesthetically pleasing (some people call this a master image), then soft proof that image for a desired target output device (aka a specific device profile, like the profile for Entrada Bright paper on a generic Pro-1000 printer using standard inks), then there IS a profile associated with that image. Lightroom knows what the profile and rendering intent associated with that print proof are if you have not deliberately changed them and it seems only reasonable that Lightroom use that information (if present) to make the user’s life easier by automatically setting the Print Module profile and rendering intent.

Obviously, if you set up to print a multi-image page in the print module, it is possible to create a circumstance where you have images which have been proofed in (“associated with”) multiple output profiles. So yes, there is a potential circumstance to be concerned with. As a user, it seems likely to me that I would not get the results I wanted if I combined proofs intended for a bright white paper with proofs intended for a reflective silver paper. If I did that and got crappy output, it would be my fault. But Lightroom can help me avoid that crappy output by reminding me that the multiple proofs in that page do not all have the same output profile associated with them.

(Edited to resolve a couple of typos)
(Edited)
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 1456 Posts
  • 583 Reply Likes
“If your meaning is to establish that there is not necessarily an output color profile embedded in the image to be used, duh. That would be incredibly inefficient.”

But that is how it is. The output profile is not embedded in the image. Lightroom could of course ‘associate’ it in an extra database field, but it doesn't to my knowledge. Lightroom can't even export your image in the destination profile if you wanted to!

Mind you, I'm not saying Adobe could not somehow do what you asked, but it would not work the way you think.
Photo of Evan Robinson

Evan Robinson

  • 9 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
You've completely ignored the fact that Lightroom already associates a profile with a proof.  It's right there in the copy name.  Don't believe me?  Go to Lightroom, select an image in the Develop module, click the "Soft Proofing" checkbox, and push the "Create Proof Copy" button.  Go back to the Library module and look at the "Copy Name" field of the proof image.  It will say something like "AdobeRGB, Perceptual".  That text makes it possible for Lightroom to determine that this proof copy was made with the AdobeRGB profile and the Perceptual rendering intent.

Implementation of my suggestion (fixing the design bug, IMO) would require parsing the copy name to see if it matches a combination of profiles present and rendering intents supported*.  My initial design suggestion would be that if a valid profile name is found, it be selected in the Print module, and that if a profile were found and selected and a valid rendering intent were found, it be selected as well.  If neither is found or (possibly) if extra text is found, then the previously used profile and intent should be used.  I'd want to kick the edge cases around with others to decide definitively how to handle them.  It's been a long time since I argued with Andrei over UI design, but I know enough to know I haven't thought every aspect of this through.

(edited to add paragraph spacing and to add footnote)

* is there a better way to have done this?  Yes.  Will this way work?  Yes.
(Edited)
Photo of Johan Elzenga

Johan Elzenga, Champion

  • 1456 Posts
  • 583 Reply Likes
I'm sorry, I'm not going to contiune to discuss color management with you. A proof copy is a virtual copy, so you can save specific edits you made during soft proofing. It has nothing to do with 'embedding' the printer profile in that copy. Lightroom is a non-destructive editor, it never embeds anything in the file. And a virtual copy isn't even a file, it's just an extra set of xmp data.
Photo of Evan Robinson

Evan Robinson

  • 9 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
And I never, ever, ever said anything about embedding a profile until it seemed like that was what you were responding to.