Digital BW, The Print

I'm trying to work out the kinks in my workflow and thought you guys 
could set me straight. When I finish editing an image and move on to 
soft proof, the image shifts but ends up resembling pretty closely what 
the printed image will look like. The problem is, what if I don't like 
the shift that takes place and would rather have the print end up 
looking much more like the non-soft proofed image? (Note that my 
monitor is calibrated with a Spyder.)Do I save the edited image as an 
edited master file and then continue editing the soft proofed image 
until I'm satisfied, and then save that image as a file soft proofed 
for the particular profile & paper I'm using? Whew, this is confusing.
-MK

"Michael" <michael3442@...> wrote:
>
> I'm trying to work out the kinks in my workflow ... 

> When I finish editing an image and move on to soft proof, 
> the image shifts ...

Ideally, you'd edit your image in the working space that would match 
the print so that there would be no shift.  

On the other hand, since I use more than one printer workflow I now 
edit in gray working space Gray Gamma 2.2.  (Set in Photoshop at 
Edit>Color Settings>Workins Spaces>Gray.)  I wanted to use the most 
standardized space.  For color, Adobe RGB (1998) appears to be the most 
widely used standard, and Gray Gamma 2.2 appears to be a subset of 
this.  

If a printing workflow is "color managed" such that the printer 
software reads the image's embedded profile or workspace, then on a 
calibrated system, the print should match the monitor.  I think the use 
of QTR's Create ICC to accomplish this is about the best and easiest 
B&W workflow we have now because is solves this long-standing problem 
of the print not matching the monitor, at least with respect to the 
relative densities.  Any Epson driver based B&W workflow should be able 
to use these ICCs.  For example, if one uses the Epson "Advanced B&W" 
workflow, these ICCs can be made for the specific ABW settings you use 
and then inserted in the PS Print preview when printing.

Most of our B&W workflows are not color managed. So, there are a 
variety of techniques poeple use to get a better match.  My particular 
workflows either use QTR's Create ICC or QTR Rip.  The Rip has what I 
call a straight-line characteristic curve, as opposed to the compressed 
shadows of Gray Gamma 2.2.  To correct for this, I have a Photoshop 
curve (often just put on a layer) that does the compensation/conversion 
(GG22-to-QTR.acv).
(See http://www.paulroark.com/BW-Info/GG22-to-QTR.zip)  

By using this curve I don't have to re-edit the underlying file.  If 
the file is 16 bit, there should be plenty of room to do this without 
the loss of any significant information.

This is just one of any number of solutions to this problem.

Hope this helps.

Paul
www.PaulRoark.com