Complete softproofing and color management functions (like in Adobe and other prof. software packages)

[Terry317]

I may have to stop using affinity, as I presently have to export photos I want to print as a tiff file, import into an old CS3 copy of photoshop so I can print. Trouble is when I upgrade to the new MAC OS the old CS3 will no longer work. I either need to purchase a copy of Elements just to print or get the monthly subscription and use it for everything. Affinity does a lot of things pretty well, but lack of color management is such a big negative for those like me that print images that the good features are mostly negated. 

[rpnfan]

That's true, but Affinity does not care about being able to allow a prof. color workflow.

[rpnfan]

On 4/18/2020 at 11:21 PM, rpnfan said:

Currently Affinity lacks complete colormanagement / softproof functionality.

Missing is:

1) Preserve RGB / CMYK numbers → this is needed to simulate how an RGB file will look like on a non-colormanaged RGB printer (like often in a photo lab) or how a CMYK file which will not be converted to another colour space will look in a specific CMYK space.
BTW, this option is also needed when you want to print out a (ICC color) calibration target from the Affinity application itself.

2 a) Option "Simulate Paper color" → this determines the rendering intent from the (converted) file to the monitor colour space regarding the white point:

"Simulate Paper = On" → absolute colorimetric conversion from the file to the monitor color space

                             = Off → relative colorimetric conversion from the file to the monitor color space

2b) "Simulate Black Ink" → determines if Black point compensation from the file to the monitor colour space is used or not

"Simulate Black Ink = On" → Blackpoint Compensation from File to Monitor Colour Space turned off

"Simulate Black Ink = Off" → Blackpoint Compensation from File to Monitor Color Space turned on

Affinity offers now a softproof and conversion of a file to another color space. But it lacks to control how the files are rendered to the monitor colour space!

The default rendering intent in Photoshop to the Monitor profile (color space) is: Relative colorimetric with blackpoint compensation and can be influenced like described here, which of course is a vital feature!

3) A preview for "Assign Profile" is also missing currently

4) A keyboard shortcut to toggle the softproof on / off can also be very handy and is missing now 😞

5) In Publisher I do not see an option to enable the softproof function for the complete document, but only for each page!? If that's not possible (which it seems) -- this is an additional need.

6) Exporting images: Currently there is lacking

6a) Choose rendering intent for the conversion

6b) Preview for this conversion (in the export dialog)

7) In "better" color managed programs one can also choose which CMM is used for the conversion -- which is now also lacking.

See here for the colour management options from Adobe: https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/proofing-colors.html

 

Extending the list in case some day someone at Affinity might care to finally implement the missing colour management options....

8 )  in Publisher it's not possible to assign / convert to a specific colour space on an object basis.

[gunda]

I support the general thrust of this feature request, and #1 preserve numbers in particular, especially for monochrome.  I need to be able to simulate how a print will look without a profile conversion.  I can't ditch Photoshop without it, and boy, I'd like to.

[MM@Photosence]

On 11/30/2020 at 11:05 AM, gunda said:

I support the general thrust of this feature request, and #1 preserve numbers in particular, especially for monochrome.  I need to be able to simulate how a print will look without a profile conversion.  I can't ditch Photoshop without it, and boy, I'd like to.

I just (yesterday) bought Affinity Photo, and wanted to try setting Black- White- and Grey points in an image to discover this embarrasing incompleteness. Yes- I wanted to get rid of my Adobe subscription too , what a shame I wasted my money here.    I am very surprised that a company 'for professionals' fails to deliver the features for the core functionality that color management is.  I now have a fully working car that can't take me to my destination.  

[gunda]

16 hours ago, MM@Photosence said:

I just (yesterday) bought Affinity Photo, and wanted to try setting Black- White- and Grey points in an image to discover this embarrasing incompleteness. Yes- I wanted to get rid of my Adobe subscription too , what a shame I wasted my money here.    I am very surprised that a company 'for professionals' fails to deliver the features for the core functionality that color management is.  I now have a fully working car that can't take me to my destination.  

Yes, it's puzzling.  If this was just a budget, no-frills alternative to PS then I could understand it.  But it's part of a suite of three products seemingly aimed at the publishing industry, and so you think that industry standard features for publishing and printing would find their way into the product sooner or later.

I realise that there are competing priorities, and you can't work on everything simultaneously, especially at the current price, but even so, see previous para.

[MM@Photosence]

4 hours ago, gunda said:

I realise that there are competing priorities, and you can't work on everything simultaneously, especially at the current price, but even so, see previous para.

I was sold on the supposition* that the products had such quintessential, minimum** requirements in place and that their

pricing reflected (amongst other things) an R&D policy of industry compatibility first,  competitive features (prioritized from rudimentary to niche usage) second. 

Professionals can not use Affinity to produce colour managed output,  perhaps we simply do not belong to Serif's target audience.

Maybe we will in the future.  Rincewind's feature request that Rpnfan refers to is from 2018  is not a gimme for a box of toys.  It is a professional need and it embodies a solid opportunity

for Affinity to vastly expand its market by incorporating

4 hours ago, gunda said:

industry standard features for publishing and printing

Needs may be met some day or remain a request gathering dust on some forum, 

I wish Serif wisdom, I took my loss and don't take the luxury to wait

for change to happen. 

Thanks for your reply Gunda.

 

  *  based on a decent number of articles that suggest and compare photoshop alternatives         

  ** to meet industry standards  

[Johannes]

7 hours ago, MM@Photosence said:

Professionals can not use Affinity to produce colour managed output,

I can and I do use Affinity to produce color managed output on a daily basis.

This made my income for about  the last 25 years mainly with Adobe products but the last 5 years mainly with Affinity products.

I use a fully calibrated workflow in the same manner I did with Adobe products. No HDR yet.

My two main outputs are files for Web in sRGB and Print in ISO-coatedv2/3
Input sources sRGB eciRGB AdobeRGB P3 and more.

Making CMYK-PDFs with embedded wide gamut RGB images for printers with larger color space works.

 

There are some inconveniences though:

Softproofing with a layer doesn’t make much sense. It should be a view setting.
There has to be a way to preprint-check PDF-files. I still do that with Acrobat Pro. 

And more ...

 

[MM@Photosence]

15 hours ago, Johannes said:

I can and I do use Affinity to produce color managed output on a daily basis.

This made my income for about  the last 25 years mainly with Adobe products but the last 5 years mainly with Affinity products.

I use a fully calibrated workflow in the same manner I did with Adobe products. No HDR yet.

My two main outputs are files for Web in sRGB and Print in ISO-coatedv2/3
Input sources sRGB eciRGB AdobeRGB P3 and more.

Making CMYK-PDFs with embedded wide gamut RGB images for printers with larger color space works.

 

There are some inconveniences though:

Softproofing with a layer doesn’t make much sense. It should be a view setting.
There has to be a way to preprint-check PDF-files. I still do that with Acrobat Pro. 

And more ...

 

Thanks Johannes, I can't edit that post so I will rephrase "Professionals can not use Affinity to produce colour managed output"

Rephrased:   As a professional (fine art photography)  I cannot use Affinity photo to employ the color management workflow that I use with Adobe to create my work. 

I need to set white- black- and grey points with a color sampler so I can make separate, individual corrections for the red green and blue channels, right at te beginning of my workflow.  I want to be able to  do my softproofing through an iic-profile-adjusted copy of my finalized file and I need that copy to emulate the paper I will print on so I can see on my screen what my printer will produce.  To do that I need the finalized original and printing copy side by side so I can accurately adjust the copy and bring it as close to the finalized original as I can. That way I can safely create an optimized  printing file that will accurately print what the adjusted copy looks like on screen.

I work with regularly calibrated hardware.

 

 

Edited December 4, 2020 by MM@Photosence
I corrected some spelling and phrasing

[Johannes]

10 minutes ago, MM@Photosence said:

Thanks Johannes, I will narrow down what I said: ( ,,Professionals can not use Affinity to produce colour managed output" )

Rephrased:   As a professional photographer and artist  I cannot use Affinity photo to employ the color management workflow that I use with Adobe to create my work.  I need to set white- black- and grey points with a color sampler and I want to do individual corrections for the red green and blue channel right at te beginning of my workflow.  I want to be able to  do my softproofing through an iic-profile-adjusted copy of my finalized file and I need that copy to emulate the paper I will print on so I can see on my screen what my printer will produce.  To do that I need the finalized original and printing copy side by side so I can accurately adjust the copy and bring it as close to the finalized original as I can. That way I can safely create an optimized  printing file that will accurately print the way the adjusted copy looks like on screen.

I work with regularly calibrated hardware.

 

 

I am sorry. I don't understand halve of what you are saying. Especially why you wouldn't just generate an .icc profile by calibrating your printer (with the desired paper) and use this profile for softproofing.

[walt.farrell]

42 minutes ago, MM@Photosence said:

I need to set white- black- and grey points with a color sampler

Apologies if I don't quite understand what you want...

You can set samplers using the Info panel

43 minutes ago, MM@Photosence said:

I want to be able to  do my softproofing through an iic-profile-adjusted copy of my finalized file and I need that copy to emulate the paper I will print on so I can see on my screen what my printer will produce

Sounds like a standard use of a Soft Proof Adjustment.

44 minutes ago, MM@Photosence said:

To do that I need the finalized original and printing copy side by side so I can accurately adjust the copy and bring it as close to the finalized original as I can

That's also possible. On Mac use Separated Mode. On Windows just Float the two images side-by-side but dragging them free from the tab area, or using the menu.

[MM@Photosence]

Thank you for your suggestions Johannes and Walt,

 

The way I work, I want to correct the original RAW image first (with setting black white and grey points) that way I can (as desired) remove or manipulate a sensor colour cast of a camera and 

determine the detail in the darker and brighter zones of my image, With these corrections done I can process my image to wherever I want to take it.

 

I am not sure I can pull it off with the info panel Walt.

It is somewhat like you see here.  http:// https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvv8NeeYEeI&feature=youtu.be&hd=1

I do a lot more though,  I make three separate curves adjustment layers for Black White and Grey and correct in each adjustment layer the sampled values for the Red Green and Blue channels

for my blackpoint I set the rgb values to 7,  for grey to 128 and to 247 for white. 

With these 3 layers I sometimes change opacities and their stacking order to taste.

Thanks for the suggestion  Walt to float a  finalized image next to a copy rendered with my icc profile. 

Yes I can softproof with an adjustment layer (thanks W) but regardless of where the icc profile comes from (I agree with J that a printer generated one is best),

I really want  to softproof while the screen shows me what the result will be on a particular paper;  to avoid printing something I don't want I use a proof setting

that toggles how the colours pan out when they are printed (by the relevant printer) on the particular paper the profile is made for.

At the bottom of the pop up:

I hope I have shed some light on my ideas and wants.  Thanks  both for your insights on this.

 

Edited December 4, 2020 by MM@Photosence
Corrected Walt's name, replace 'a' for '3'

[gunda]

11 hours ago, Johannes said:

I am sorry. I don't understand halve of what you are saying. Especially why you wouldn't just generate an .icc profile by calibrating your printer (with the desired paper) and use this profile for softproofing.

What you're suggesting is a fairly standard way of working for most photographers who then print using the ICC.  But there are other workflows which many photographers may view as fringe, but which are fairly standard in the publishing industry.  In my case, I want to soft-proof using the ICC, but in a way that shows me what the output will look like if I don't print using the ICC.  In PS you o this by enabling the preserve numbers soft-proofing option.  There are valid uses for this approach, which is why PS includes it.  Can't be done in AP at present.

I also find soft-proofing via a layer to be a risky approach, rather than using a view mode.  I've done something like this in PS in the past, since some ICCs can be simulated via a curve, and there's a risk of leaving the layer enabled when you don't want it.  Operator error, sure, but it's always going to be a risk with this approach.

[Johannes]

7 hours ago, gunda said:

What you're suggesting is a fairly standard way of working for most photographers who then print using the ICC.  But there are other workflows which many photographers may view as fringe, but which are fairly standard in the publishing industry.  In my case, I want to soft-proof using the ICC, but in a way that shows me what the output will look like if I don't print using the ICC.  In PS you o this by enabling the preserve numbers soft-proofing option.  There are valid uses for this approach, which is why PS includes it.  Can't be done in AP at present.

I also find soft-proofing via a layer to be a risky approach, rather than using a view mode.  I've done something like this in PS in the past, since some ICCs can be simulated via a curve, and there's a risk of leaving the layer enabled when you don't want it.  Operator error, sure, but it's always going to be a risk with this approach.

Quote

what the output will look like if I don't print using the ICC

I hope I understand you right: You want to know what a certain printer produces if it gets your work without a color profile or threw it away, right?

I would bet that no printer prints without its own internal profile. And incoming data has to be converted to this color profile. This is only possible if the data includes its profile for output intent. If there is no profile within the file the printer has to assume a profile as calculation source. I am sure there are some cheap printers that throw away any incoming profile and assume another one. If you know what this assumption is you could as well use this profile for softproofing the case of "non color managed printing".  I guess a lot of printers assume sRGB or ISOcoatedv2//Fogra39. Of course this only works if the assumed color space is smaller than the printers and there is eg. still no paper taken into account. I guess I somehow understand you now 😬

Quote

soft-proofing via a layer to be a risky approach

I totally agree on that.

[gunda]

15 hours ago, Johannes said:

You want to know what a certain printer produces if it gets your work without a color profile or threw it away, right?  I would bet that no printer prints without its own internal profile. And incoming data has to be converted to this color profile. 😬

If you print through the standard Epson / Canon / HP printer driver then I suspect that preserve numbers won't be of much use / will only rarely be of use.  You'll have to trust us that there are workflows where it is of use.  For my part, I'm printing through a B&W RIP.

[rpnfan]

Version 1.9 → no updates to the color managment 😞

Quote

I hope I understand you right: You want to know what a certain printer produces if it gets your work without a color profile or threw it away, right?

Regardless if you understand the need or not...  there are use-cases where one needs that function. Gunda explained that and I have also mentioned that in my posts.

[rpnfan]

Any updates on the topic?

[rpnfan]

Years after the first people mentioning that Affinity needs to fully support colormanagement, when Affinity truly wants to become a solutions for professionals and more than a year later after I posted this message I do not see any progress or even interest in this topic.

When I work together with design agencies and ask them for idml-files so I can open those in Affinity they tell me that they do not even know Affinity Photo or Publisher -- let alone would use it.

I love many aspects of Affinity programs, but have to use workarounds for cooperating with others and use old Adobe licenses for color critical work or tasks. I'd like to hear if Affinity plans to ever implement the complete set of color-management tools which have been in use since the year 2000! A half-baked soft-proofing option my means of a layer does not cut it!

[gunda]

11 hours ago, rpnfan said:

Years after the first people mentioning that Affinity needs to fully support colormanagement, when Affinity truly wants to become a solutions for professionals and more than a year later after I posted this message I do not see any progress or even interest in this topic.

When I work together with design agencies and ask them for idml-files so I can open those in Affinity they tell me that they do not even know Affinity Photo or Publisher -- let alone would use it.

I love many aspects of Affinity programs, but have to use workarounds for cooperating with others and use old Adobe licenses for color critical work or tasks. I'd like to hear if Affinity plans to ever implement the complete set of color-management tools which have been in use since the year 2000! A half-baked soft-proofing option my means of a layer does not cut it!

Can only agree.

[wonderings]

On 12/8/2021 at 7:21 AM, rpnfan said:

When I work together with design agencies and ask them for idml-files so I can open those in Affinity they tell me that they do not even know Affinity Photo or Publisher -- let alone would use it.

If I was a design house and you asked for idml files to open in another program other then the program it was created in I would not be too thrilled as well. Too many things can change and get messed up taking an Indesign file and opening in Publisher. This is not the way to work collaboratively and only opens yourself up for problems that may or may not be caught before going to print or whatever medium it is going to. 

[rpnfan]

On 12/9/2021 at 2:11 PM, wonderings said:

If I was a design house and you asked for idml files to open in another program other then the program it was created in I would not be too thrilled as well. Too many things can change and get messed up taking an Indesign file and opening in Publisher. This is not the way to work collaboratively and only opens yourself up for problems that may or may not be caught before going to print or whatever medium it is going to. 

If / when IDML export and import does not work it will not really bring much benefit to the table, doesn't it?

So you suggest that everybody should continue to use Adobe programs then...? Then I do not need an IDML import in Affinity

But even when one creates a document in Affinity programs I do need the complete set of colormanagement functions to be able to work reliable with RGB and CMYK colors and do conversions in between when needed (incl. a preview).

[wonderings]

3 hours ago, rpnfan said:

If / when IDML export and import does not work it will not really bring much benefit to the table, doesn't it?

So you suggest that everybody should continue to use Adobe programs then...? Then I do not need an IDML import in Affinity

But even when one creates a document in Affinity programs I do need the complete set of colormanagement functions to be able to work reliable with RGB and CMYK colors and do conversions in between when needed (incl. a preview).

I do suggest and recommend everyone works with the software that others use if they need to collaborate. The industry standard is Adobe, I prefer it over Affinity and would not replace Adobe with Affinity right now. It is nice knowing when I get files I know how they were made and if I get working files I can work with them and be on the same version as everyone else. 

I agree with colour management in Affinity though, that is a separate issue then collaborating with people using different software than you. 

[rpnfan]

Has someone already checked the new Affinity suite 2? Do they finally support full ICC colormanagement which Adobe introduced over 20 years ago?

[Johannes]

9 hours ago, rpnfan said:

Has someone already checked the new Affinity suite 2? Do they finally support full ICC colormanagement which Adobe introduced over 20 years ago?

I didn’t check specificly but It wasn’t mentioned in new feature introduction videos as far as I remember. I was almost happy with color management in v1 but you can have a free look at v2 with the 30 day trial.

[rpnfan]

Danke Johannes, "but I don't hold my breath"... Von daher spare ich mir die Zeit und warte, ob zu meiner Überraschung doch etwas passiert wäre. Ich bin im Wesentlichen mit Affinity durch. Ich hatte zuviele Probleme, hab' etliches an Zeit verloren die Software für mich nutzbar werden zu lassen  und doch ist die S/W teils buggy -- und Updates bekomme ich nun nicht mehr. Ich sehe nicht ein für weitere Beta-Versionen -- das ist für mich die Affinity Suite -- mit zu vielen wichtigen fehlenden Funktionen Geld zu bezahlen. Dann halt weiter die alten Adobe-Lizenzen benutzen. Sicher ist Affinity in Teilen besser als eine alte CSx-Version, aber in wichtigen Punkten leider eben nicht. 
Als ich mir damals die Mühe gemacht habe genau aufzulisten was und warum im Bereich ICC-Farbmanagement fehlt, hatte ich noch die Hoffnung, oder ist es mehr ein Irrglaube, dass Affinity wirklich versuchen würde ein Alternative zu Adobe aufzubauen.