Photoshop Problem!

[follicle]

I've been having this problem ever since I installed CS2 on my home PC. Images in photoshop appear much lighter and less saturated than outside of photoshop. For example, I took a photo of the net (looked good). I brought it into photoshop and it looked lighter and washed out. I do a lot of photo illustrations in photoshop. I worked on one piece for nearly too months (in PSD format of course). When I got finished, I went to go save it as a JPG. The results where astonishing (See attached). After I saved it as a JPG, I changed my color settings to "Monitor Color", brought it back into photoshop (It appeared like it did on the right) and I adjusted it until it looked normal and resaved it as a JPG (then it was alright). What could this be? Color problems? If so, what do I do? I'm completely unintelligent when it comes to color adjust ments. I've tried saving in different formats. I'm lost and any help would be greatly appreciated.
http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b326/follicle/Sample.jpg

[Loopy]

Sorry I can't help you... I just wanted to say that I really like that piece.

[urstwile]

How are your Photoshop color settings set up? It almost looks like you might have the default sRGB in place when you open a new file.

Do you get a prompt when you open your file up asking if you want to color manage? And if so, what do you choose?

Adobe RGB 1998 is probably better than monitor RGB, by the way, depending on what type of monitor you have. Monitor RGB could be clipping the colors to the gamut of your particular monitor.

[rickself]

Personally, I think jpeg should be removed as an option in Photoshop. If you need to have a jpeg file for web, let the web software compress the file. JPEG is only going to degrade your file and muck up the colors.

[urstwile]

I agree, Rick. It should only be an option for save for web. It's surprising how many people don't know JPEG jacks your image up over time every time you save.

[ecsyle]

So what? Sometimes all you need is a jpg. Something small, for sharing, like posting on this forum.

[follicle]

Thanks, Loopy!

Urstwile, my default color settings are "North America General Purpose 2". I've tried fooling around with these settings, going from that to monitor color and such, with no luck. No matter what settings I have, images outside of Photoshop and images inside of Photoshop both look different in regards to brightness/contrast.

[urstwile]

When you say outside of Photoshop, do you mean when you import into other programs? Sorry, didn't look at that finer point of what you said earlier.

Because you'll never get the same preview from one program to another. Probably the most trustworthy preview will be Photoshop's, because it's first-generation, if you will.

The real test is not whether your stuff looks different on the monitor, but whether it looks different when you print it. So if it looks one way in one or three different programs, but prints out the same from all three, you're cool.

[follicle]

I never use JPG to print off my work. Only for web display. I generally either use TIFF, PNG, or PDF.

[follicle]

Good point, Urstwile. When I say outside of Photoshop, I mean using any other preview program (In this case, Windows media and fax viewer). Using the Window's preview, it appears very dark. Opening it in Photoshop, it becomes lighter and less saturated. I can usually take care of the problem by opening the file and adjusting to match certain attributes, but it's a long process. Thanks for your help so far!

[urstwile]

So how does the stuff print, follicle? Do you get different print results when printing directly out of Photoshop vs. printing out of Quark or InDesign? That to me seems to be the true test.

Quark has really bad image previews, unless you set everything up to preview at full resolution, which makes file sizes huge. InDesign seems to do better with the image previews, not to mention you can toggle off and on between low-res and high-res, but in either case, it's the program interpreting the preview.

Printing is the real test.

[urstwile]

Sorry, I tripped all over your previous post.

What operating system are you working on these images on? If you're going from Mac to PC, Mac's gamma shows images as MUCH lighter than they'll appear on a PC, and you will have to adjust for that.

[follicle]

I'm just working on PCs. As far as printing is concerned, it will print how ever it looks in Photoshop. So let's say I save the file as a JPG and open it back up in PS to print it, it'll print really dark like the image I posted. Now if I take that image and adjust it before printing, then it will print like I want it to.

Photoshop images don't really bother me as far as color is concerned. It's fixable and no one really notices. When I become frustrated is when I bring a logo or a vector file home from work to find my blues looking to violets and my reds looking like pinks. That's when color truely counts.

[urstwile]

It seems that much of it might then depend on whether your work color settings match your home color settings, follicle.

Are they the same? Are you using the same kind of monitors in both places?

Try this: set the color samplers in your file up in four of the critical areas: highlights, midtones, shadows, and 3/4 tones. Save the file that way. Write the numbers down. Then bring the file home, open the file up with those color samplers saved, and if the numbers change, then something's shifting your colors, perhaps a color setting from one location to the next. If the colors stay the same, then your monitors from one place to the next are showing things differently. But they should print the same.

[follicle]

Very good idea. I'll try that. Thanks a lot for all your help!

[urstwile]

Let me know how it works out, my curiosity is piqued. :)

[rickself]

So what? Sometimes all you need is a jpg. Something small, for sharing, like posting on this forum.Very true...that's web. Every day I see images come into our shop that are rgb jpegs from designers that I would have thought knew better. Everything is jpg, jpg, jpg. Course instructors need to know the difference between print and web.

[follicle]

Rickself,

Would you recommend TIFF (with no compression) for printing?

[urstwile]

I've been hearing TIFF with LZW is okay. It's a lossless compression scheme. I've been using it for years with no complaints.

Will let Rick weigh in as well, of course, but I think I posted a thread a while back with concerns, and I think Rick and Jimking both assured me it was okay.

[ecsyle]

Very true...that's web. Every day I see images come into our shop that are rgb jpegs from designers that I would have thought knew better. Everything is jpg, jpg, jpg. Course instructors need to know the difference between print and web.
Ouch, seriously? That's sad :(

[rickself]

I've been hearing TIFF with LZW is okay. It's a lossless compression scheme. I've been using it for years with no complaints.

Will let Rick weigh in as well, of course, but I think I posted a thread a while back with concerns, and I think Rick and Jimking both assured me it was okay.Absolutely. And the great thing about tiff files and LZW is that tiff's hold a lot of air anyway. LZW is safe, effective, and should be habit forming. Ask your prepress guy if LZW is right for you. Good Lord, I've been watching too much TV! :eek:

[rickself]

Rickself,

Would you recommend TIFF (with no compression) for printing?Even if you use LZW compression, most prepress engineers look for LZW and have a batch action set up to convert 'em. I prefer tiff files because they RIP faster than eps files... unless you're using clipping paths, which work best with eps on most RIPs.

[CamarotaDesign]

hmm, I've been using mostly tiff files, but I do clipping paths a lot in illustrator, I'll save them as eps from now on. good advice, thanks

[urstwile]

Absolutely. And the great thing about tiff files and LZW is that tiff's hold a lot of air anyway. LZW is safe, effective, and should be habit forming. Ask your prepress guy if LZW is right for you. Good Lord, I've been watching too much TV! :eek:
Rick, you crack me up. :D