# Out Of Gamut Warnings



## smoke665 (Dec 5, 2016)

Sorry if this is a dumb question,  but at what point does an Out Of Gamut warning become a problem when sending a file to a photo lab??? Any rule of thumb for when you should correct? As I understand it only becomes a problem at the more extreme levels.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 5, 2016)

Out of what gamut? Soft-proof to a device profile? Or out of colorspace gamut?

Joe


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 6, 2016)

Ysarex said:


> Out of what gamut? Soft-proof to a device profile? Or out of colorspace gamut?
> 
> Joe



Here's an example.


----------



## Big Mike (Dec 6, 2016)

It's showing that those colors won't print with the profile you've selected.

Are you planing on printing this in CMYK?


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 6, 2016)

Nothing to worry about. You're getting that warning from Adobe's soft proof generic CMYK default. You're not printing your photo on a 4 color offset press and especially not a generic one that doesn't exist.

Joe


----------



## tirediron (Dec 6, 2016)

Can't you just open another bottle of gamut and add some more?


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 6, 2016)

Big Mike said:


> printing this in CMYK?



This was the default setting on PS



Ysarex said:


> You're getting that warning from Adobe's soft proof generic CMYK default.



What I'm seeking to understand is:

First of all should I even use Gamut warning? In the example the areas shown as warnings are obviously over saturated, which I can see without the annoying warning.
If so, should I continue in CMYK, or check one of the other options available. Most of my stuff is posted to the internet, but some I send to a lab for printing? And if over Gamut at what point will that become a problem in the lab rending the photo, or will they correct it?



tirediron said:


> Can't you just open another bottle of gamut



I've opened several (not gamut) over the last year, as I try to get up to speed on PS


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 6, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> Big Mike said:
> 
> 
> > printing this in CMYK?
> ...



You should use Photoshop's soft-proofing feature (which includes gamut warning) when you have a device (with a gamut) to which you're outputting your photo. Otherwise the soft-proofing functions are meaningless. Device means hardware. So you need an ICC device dependent hardware profile to proof or gamut warn against. The Photoshop CMYK generic profile is unsuitable for all photographic purposes.

Before using the soft-proof feature you need to set it up. From the view menu select Proof Setup. In the Device to Simulate you need to load your hardware device profile eg. the ICC profile for your printer and paper combination. If you're having prints made for you in a lab you could ask them if they have a profile that they make available to customers. They may or may not be willing to accommodate. If you're having prints made they are not CMYK prints and anything related to CMYK does not apply to you -- stay away.



 

In the first example of the soft-proof dialog you see I have selected a specific Canon printer and paper combination for proofing/gamut warning. By device dependent we mean that profile doesn't specify any Canon iP2700 printer it specifies the one and only Canon iP2700 located in the cabinet next to my desk.

Just for fun in the second example of the dialog I've specified the profile for my display as the target output device. A gamut warning in that case has entertaining implications about your inability to see what you're unable to see.

Joe


----------



## unpopular (Dec 6, 2016)

When working in a color controlled environment, I usually just leave soft-poofing on the whole time. If I need to convert to another output device, I do it through the profile I proofed on. In an offset environment, I'm watching ink saturation more than gamut warning anyway.

Also, work in 16-bit whenever possible. This will allow the CMS to choose a better next-best solution.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 6, 2016)

@Ysarex Thanks Joe. I've printed out your comment to put in my "cheat sheet" book. As usual your explanations are on point and easy to understand.

@unpopular  Thank you as well. I've noted your comments in the margin of the "cheat sheet" also.


----------



## Big Mike (Dec 7, 2016)

Good explanation.
Just to add...
Understanding Soft Proofing - Luminous Landscape
Soft Proofing: Matching On-Screen Photos with Prints


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 7, 2016)

Thank you @Big Mike just read this.

Only one other question on the subject. Under the <Proof Setup> has anyone ever checked/used <Internet Standard RGB (sRGB)> option? If so did you find any benefit to it?


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 7, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> Thank you @Big Mike just read this.
> 
> Only one other question on the subject. Under the <Proof Setup> has anyone ever checked/used <Internet Standard RGB (sRGB)> option? If so did you find any benefit to it?



If you're going to place the photo on the Internet then just do the sRGB conversion (you should do that). Once you've done that there's no point to soft-proofing the image to what the image already is.

When you select Convert Profile from the Edit menu the dialog box has a preview option. That'll do the same thing.

Joe


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 7, 2016)

Ysarex said:


> If you're going to place the photo on the Internet then just do the sRGB conversion (you should do that). Once you've done that there's no point to soft-proofing the image to what the image already is.



Ok, I guess I assumed it would give me a pre-conversion proof.


----------



## Ysarex (Dec 7, 2016)

smoke665 said:


> Ysarex said:
> 
> 
> > If you're going to place the photo on the Internet then just do the sRGB conversion (you should do that). Once you've done that there's no point to soft-proofing the image to what the image already is.
> ...



It would, but you have to do it anyway so just get it over with and then deal with any fallout.

My raw conversions are done using the ProPhoto color space. But to place a photo on the Internet I convert that file to the sRGB color space. 8 times out of 10 the conversion causes the red channel to clip and 2 times out of 10 it causes the blue channel to clip. I could soft-proof that in advance but that doesn't mean I can do anything about it except do the conversion and then, if it matters enough to me, do the repair.

Joe


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 7, 2016)

@Ysarex Thanks Joe, I use ProPhoto now and convert as you described. Just looking to see if there is a better mousetrap.


----------



## smoke665 (Dec 7, 2016)

@unpopular just got an email notice of a post you made on this thread recommending Photoshop for Photographers. For some strange reason, it doesn't show up anywhere on the thread?????  In any case will look into it. Thank you.


----------



## unpopular (Dec 7, 2016)

Huh. That is really weird.

Anyway, yeah. It's a super awesome book, very concise and to the point.


----------

