odd print lab proofing advice

[digitaldog]

That's certainly an option that you can setup with your lab.

Depends on the lab of course. So many just “demand” sRGB, or have no current profiles or can’t keep multiple machines behaving the same.

The problems that I've witnessed with that type of approach is that labs change papers and update profiles and customers are still using the old profiles.

Agreed but this is solely the lab’s fault here. Its not rocket science to send out an email blast or update a web page with a newer profile. We could ask why the lab can’t keep the process in line so that the original profiles remain valid.

Noritsu profiles that have the RGB GCR alteration can't be used in Photoshop so color fringing in the shadows could be present. And embedding a large output profile in each and every image can slow down the process of sending files electronically.

Can’t comment on the first part but I’ll accept this as being an issue. The 2nd bit seems pretty silly considering the size of most images and the size of most RGB output profiles. Sure, for customers with dial up, its a problem. Its akin to demanding every file sent be a JPEG and a large compression instead of a lower one (or a TIFF).

For most professionals, being able to work in their working space of choice while soft proofing with the labs profile, and sending their working space images to the lab for printing works really, really well. But naturally there's room for other workflows as long as one has a thorough conversation with the lab.

It might work really well but we don’t know if it can work far better. The bottom line is, this industry by and large is far less concerned with best practices in terms of soft proofing, conversions and consistency (although there are obvious exceptions who deserve the consumers dollars). Is it any wonder that more and more photographers are handling the output tasks themselves in house using Ink Jets when the production allows?

[digitaldog]

For those interested here's the list he sent me:

 I know Pictopia also practices this workflow.

[Scott Martin]

For those interested here's the list he sent me:

Tom, that list was sent in a private message and should not be posted here. That's just a few places off the top of my head and is by no means comprehensive. Let's not disappoint other lab owners that also run fantastic, color managed labs.

[ejnewman]

Here is what I got back from Metro Imaging (london)

"I can send you profiles for printing but please bare in mind that profiles are a help and not always a perfect representation of what you see on screen. Can you let me know what size prints you want to produce."

I'll have to find out exactly what they mean by this statement... but again seems to back-up what we are all saying here.

[tlooknbill]

Scott, stop with the email exchanges, will ya'h? You're making this out to be way more than it is.

Take a deep breath and remind yourself that you're not as big as you think. There's nothing wrong in letting everyone know there are others out there offering a different approach. Do you know how often I see WHCC, Adorama, Mpix and whole slew of other photo labs get mentioned freely on the web? Your small list isn't going to put a dent into your reputation as one of the informed.

I've never heard any of the names you listed and I've been posting and reading on these types of discussion forums since 2002. I doubt anyone is going to try them out due to the fact everybody and their dog is doing this. Why hide names of business that claim to offer a better mousetrap? Put your reputation where your mouth is for a change. GEEZ!

This is an open discussion forum where information is freely exchanged for others to learn and benefit from. The more informed we are the better off the entire industry becomes.

Competition is good. It's always good to keep one's options open. That list is just another drop in the bucket.

And I don't have an NDA contract with anyone nor will I ever. That's not how I roll. If you didn't want those names known, you shouldn't have given them to me. What's to prevent me from cutting and pasting them in other photography forums?

People aren't as stupid as you might think. You telegraph to folks in this thread that you're providing names in an email only to me, while knowing full well I have the freedom to post them in other forums. You think others aren't picking up on that. Give me a break!

[ejnewman]

Moving back on to the topic at hand... Here is the communication with Metro:

ME:
"Regarding colour management, all I am after is the ability to soft  
proof so I am able to see what I am going to get, I assume that is the  
same thing your lab technicians are doing, the only difference being I  
want to have that control.

Could you elaborate on your statement? I'm aware of the inherent  
differences between light and paper, and the differences in colour  
gamuts - that I don't mind, but using correctly profiled ICC luts  
should enable a pretty good interpretation, at least better than not.

Can you also tell me whether you print your black and White images on  
black and White silver paper? I know many labs use colour chemistry  
for b&w which results in colour shifts."

METRO:
"Yes you have the drift of it. Profiles are a guide and the reason why we are a bit careful giving them out is that some clients expect a perfect match to screen. In reality some colours don't reproduce 100% true because of the different mediums between screen and photographic dyes. I can supply profiles for our Lambda, Lightjet or Polielettronica.

We are the only lab in the UK to produce true Black and White prints from digital files. We use Harman Galerie FB Digital and RC papers. Harman will shortly be releasing a warm tone paper as well. We can produce these prints up to mural size. The Galerie Fibre paper is particularly beautiful with a very deep DMax. Monochrome files are worked up here to print and we don't offer profiles for Black and White images."

[ejnewman]

I have to say I'm disappointed that they dont offer profiles for B&W, and I don't understand why.