After the 2015.6 update, Lightroom can no longer select CMYK profiles in the soft proofing section of Develop in the "other" dialog. Only CMYK profiles that had been added using previous Lightroom versions still work. It is as if somehow an earlier version of the Lightroom code had been merged into this version. This will need fixing.
Posted 3 years ago
avinash r, Employee
What a mess. CMYK didn't work at all exporting to JPEG in Print in the last version. STILL doesn't in the last update from the other day.
Now new CMYK profiles don't show up but old one's do. Beta issues that should be detected and fixed before release is becoming more the norm for for Adobe over the past few years and it's not a good sign gang! Who's checking this stuff before release? Seem no one.
Now new CMYK profiles don't show up but old one's do. Beta issues that should be detected and fixed before release is becoming more the norm for for Adobe over the past few years and it's not a good sign gang! Who's checking this stuff before release? Seem no one.
avinash r, Employee
Hi Andrew,
Yes, the fact that CMYK profiles had issues dates back to LR 6.4 or even earlier. This issue needs to be sorted at the root .i.e when the CMYK profiles support was introduced and hence requires deeper investigation. This is one of the priority items and will be addressed soon. We thank you for your patience.
Yes, the fact that CMYK profiles had issues dates back to LR 6.4 or even earlier. This issue needs to be sorted at the root .i.e when the CMYK profiles support was introduced and hence requires deeper investigation. This is one of the priority items and will be addressed soon. We thank you for your patience.
Soft proofing without the ability to ALSO convert and export to CMYK is kind of useless! Need both and an option for Absolute Colorimetric rendering intent which LR has never provided. That's why this is probably a Photoshop domain.
Soft proofing without the ability to ALSO convert and export to CMYK is kind of uselessNo, it's not. For many people it's essential for color correction (Dan Margulis way). And if your goal is still a CMYK file, you can make adjustments in Lightroom but make the color space conversion itself in Photoshop or other software (either free or proprietary).
Although I agree that prepress color correction and CMYK work is almost exclusively resides in Photoshop domain, I still think that Lightroom should have CMYK soft proofing. The technology is there and I can see no reason why it's such a big deal to bring it back to Lightroom (it's been almost a year), other that it not being a priority.
Dan’s very tired old ideas about correcting in CMYK should go the way of the dodo bird. Even Dan later moved to using Lab, a device independent color space for this work. CMYK is an output ready, specific color model and all over the map. And LR is a totally RGB processing path so all you’ll get from it is either CMYK values (gone, not really necessary; we have Lab) or it maybe converting to some CMYK space when you export. So you can totally forget about Dan’s old CMYK “fix a trud appearing image in Photoshop” in this product. And IF you still have a CMYK file, you can’t process it in LR; again it’s engine is solely RGB (it IS the ACR, raw converter engine). So what’s the point of soft proofing in a color space you can’t edit? Answer: none.
Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion
I cut my teeth on Dan's color correction methods too, so I understand the desire to stick with the familiar. I have to agree with Andrew though - there are much better options these days. Lightroom's not the tool for doing things the 20-year-old way. What is it you like about Dan's methods specifically? The ability to correct by the numbers?
Correcting by the CMYK numbers is akin to trying to count cards at a Vegas blackjack table. They are all over the map. CMYK numbers for just skin tone using the same CMYK ‘ink colors’ with just differing black gen!
http://digitaldog.net/files/BlackGenCMYK_Skin.jpg
Which of the three values, but showing identical color appearance is correct; any?
The old CMYK by the numbers dates back when some of us ran drum scanners where such products while RGB, could only output CMYK for a specific press/paper behavior. We had to learn the CMYK values over time because that’s all we had! Based on one output! This isn’t 1990; we have calibrated and profiled displays, readouts in RGB and Lab and the ability to fix/render from raw using the wonderful ACR engine which is and always will be RGB based.
http://digitaldog.net/files/BlackGenCMYK_Skin.jpg
Which of the three values, but showing identical color appearance is correct; any?
The old CMYK by the numbers dates back when some of us ran drum scanners where such products while RGB, could only output CMYK for a specific press/paper behavior. We had to learn the CMYK values over time because that’s all we had! Based on one output! This isn’t 1990; we have calibrated and profiled displays, readouts in RGB and Lab and the ability to fix/render from raw using the wonderful ACR engine which is and always will be RGB based.
Jao van de Lagemaat
L F
If at all possible, could you also look into changing the way curves values are displayed during proofing so it shows RGB/CMYK values (depending on proof profile) instead of percentage?
Peter Brydon
Andrew Rodney
Mel Leet
Andrew Rodney
adamkallin
Andrew Rodney
Mel Leet
Andrew Rodney