Can't see new colour profile window after upgrade to Pro+ 20.8.0.61047

I suppose that statement and the linked article could lend itself to thinking that one should see a difference in cmyk vector objects.

Try this. Use an rgb image. Especially one with color way outside the cmyk gamut. Then switch profiles. That should show up differences.

However, I do not know how Xara is handling...assign or convert when importing an rgb image. If they are even dealing with the issue--but one should have a choice. Using assign, one should not see a difference, or much of a difference between cmyk models except where ink limits affect the characterization. Using convert, one should see an obvious difference (depending on the image) between the image editor and XDP+.

there is a difference in the PDF/x export when viewed on screen in adobe reader, between two of the cmyk profiles in xara selected at random, this difference is not there on the screen in xara - subtle but there in reader

the diifference is lost when they are reimported into xara

all this is with cmyk colour model and simulate print colours active

the xara representation is 'brighter than either of the PDFs in reader

Thank you guys for your reaction. I just wanted to make sure it doesn't work. However, as usual.

I don't expect much from print color simulation. But I'm quite happy with the Proof Colors in Photoshop, for example.
I thought that a miracle happened and Xara created something similar.

I was also surprised by Affinity Designer that I recently purchased for symbolic money.
Of course, the AD's toolkit lags behind XDP. But the export opportunities are impressive.

I have uninstalled the demo version of Pro+. :)

sure - if I have to dabble in cmyk I use affinity - unlike mike I don't have acrobat; I would rather leave it all to the print guys like him and just do as I am directed

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handrawn

unlike mike I don't have acrobat

---

PDF Studio Pro from Qoppa Software is a simple alternative with basic tools for print production(Preflight, Imposition and Output Preview). This is not comparable to Adobe software, but very useful for those who rarely need an Acrobat.

thanks ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by handrawn

there is a difference in the PDF/x export when viewed on screen in adobe reader, between two of the cmyk profiles in xara selected at random, this difference is not there on the screen in xara - subtle but there in reader

the diifference is lost when they are reimported into xara

all this is with cmyk colour model and simulate print colours active

the xara representation is 'brighter than either of the PDFs in reader

---

Reader uses the exact same color management as Acrobat, so no worries there.

As regards color differences XDP+ vs. Reader. Without downloading the trial (or taking Bhav up on the offer to test the color management), I don't know what/why there is a change.

There are a couple possibilities as to how, or if, the pdf is including the profile. If a at the document level, then Acrobat/Reader will display using that profile. But if XDP+ is tagging elements and not embedding the profile at the document level, then one has to make sure the Output Preview panel is open AND that the correct output profile is displayed in the Simulation Profile drop down--which is something Reader does not do.

As for the initial set of screen shots, I get the exact same color representation with cmyk vector objects no matter the document cmyk color profile in Illustrator...else it is so subtle I cannot see a difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mwenz

As for the initial set of screen shots, I get the exact same color representation with cmyk vector objects no matter the document cmyk color profile in Illustrator...else it is so subtle I cannot see a difference.

---

In general, in Photoshop, the difference is quite visible.
I certainly don't use crazy profiles. Yes, the difference between Coated Fogra 27 and 39 is hardly noticeable. But those standard profiles I use are very close to the printed result. This gives me more confidence.

This is CMYK photoshop file with two vector objects.
Attachment 129031

I can predict from having prepared hundreds of my stereograms for publication what colors are going to be more or less true to the RGB screen colors and which are not.

I did a quick test with four bright vector colors. Then I switched to Simulate Print Colors and did a screen capture.

I did a screen capture of the colors exported to PDF Commercial Printing, and finally as a CMYK TIFF.

Of the group the two closest are the PDF and Xara's CMYK TIFF.

Without knowing how Xara implemented the CM they used, I have near exhausted my input.

In general, you should not be using Relative Colormetric for your proof setup in PS if this job will be professionally printed. It's a good choice for home/prosumer print devices (esp. inkjets) but not if producing a pdf being (especially) offset printed or on calibrated professional print devices. As well, simulating paper color and Relative's therefore default of using simulated black also isn't a good thing in general. Depending on the type of job, even BPC may give false impression of what may actually print.

I would suggest using Perceptual in your PS proofing, with BPC unchecked.

Xara does need to have those settings exposed if they aren't, though.