Why do all my NEF->JPEG outputs turn dark

[hhvaal]

Whenever I export my NEF file either through JPEG Full Size batch output, or just click soft proofing and choose any profile, the dark areas of the pictures will turn darker. I am using the system default monitor profile (but nothing changed when I tried the edid-acquired profile icm file).

If I try to export/soft proof JPEG images the same way, it works as expected.
I can probably get a screenshot of this happening, but hopefully my explanation will suffice.

Am I misunderstanding something here? Or am I simply supposed to turn soft proofing on and pump up the exposure/fill light/etc every time I want to export?

Harald

[afx]

What screen? Where does the EDID profile come from, hardware calibration device in the screen or just a screen default?
Which viewer do you use for the JPGs, AS or something else?

cheers
afx

[hhvaal]

On the LCD screen...? Not sure what you mean

I have two LCD's, and linux supplied me with two edid-acquired screen profiles. I found them in
/home/harald/.local/share/icc/edid-390d55c73d65260160e409f2aa9207f5.icc
/home/harald/.local/share/icc/edid-70921dd4f9182c65e6ffd3a1be49a45f.icc
Those hashes correspond to the display checksum found in System Settings - Color dialog (I attached a few screenshots of this).

I have tried setting these files as monitor profile in ASP, and I have tried just leaving it at DefaultMonitor.
I even tried setting the sRGB.icm file that comes with ASP, as the monitor profile, and even then the soft proofing makes the picture go darker. Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but when I in this case tell ASP that my monitor profile corresponds with sRGB.icm, and I then tell it to soft-proof the image in sRGB, shouldn't there be no change at all?

I view pictures with gwenview or feh or qiv from the terminal, none of which are color-aware as far as I know.

Harald

[afx]

On the LCD screen...? Not sure what you mean

I have two LCD's, and linux supplied me with two edid-acquired screen profiles. I found them in
/home/harald/.local/share/icc/edid-390d55c73d65260160e409f2aa9207f5.icc
/home/harald/.local/share/icc/edid-70921dd4f9182c65e6ffd3a1be49a45f.icc
Those hashes correspond to the display checksum found in System Settings - Color dialog (I attached a few screenshots of this).

So you have some manufacturer default profiles that are not really anything to count on.

Please spend some money on a calibration device that works with ArgyllCMS and calibrate your screens. Otherwise any discussion of color accuracy becomes moot.
i1 Display pro if money permits, but a ColorMunki Display works ok as well.

I have tried setting these files as monitor profile in ASP, and I have tried just leaving it at DefaultMonitor.
I even tried setting the sRGB.icm file that comes with ASP, as the monitor profile, and even then the soft proofing makes the picture go darker. Correct me if I'm misunderstanding, but when I in this case tell ASP that my monitor profile corresponds with sRGB.icm, and I then tell it to soft-proof the image in sRGB, shouldn't there be no change at all?

That assumes you have a clean sRGB display.
Wishful thinking with the average Samsung Syncmaster toy (I have one of them in the office as a secondary screen of my Ubuntu Laptop ;-(

Also, one of the profiles shows a white point of D50, while I bet your screen is set up for D65....

I view pictures with gwenview or feh or qiv from the terminal, none of which are color-aware as far as I know.

Comparing images on screen between CM aware applications and non CM aware applications is a recipe for disaster.
geeqie is color managed and the latest version of Eye of Gnome also.
qeegie needs to be set up explicitly for this EoG does the right thing by default.

cheers
afx

[hhvaal]

Thanks for your help so far!

Now, I hope you won't just give up on me, but spending 169 dollars (for a colormunki from amazon) plus shipping and taxes just isn't in the budget for what I'm trying to do for now... At this point I am using ASP for its superb batch output workflow, linux support, selective settings copy-paste and much more, but for now the end result in 99% of the cases will be a simple sRGB JPEG file which inevitably will be viewed in non-color-managed applications on often poorly calibrated screens.

So, given these boundaries, my strategy for now might be to first adjust the monitors until it looks okay with various camera-produced JPEGs (working on the assumption that if they look good on my screen, going in that direction is my best bet), and then move backwards by either tweaking the monitor profile (not even sure if this is possible) until pre- and post-sRGB-soft-proofing looks the same, or by simply having to accept working with sRGB soft-proofing toggled on while tweaking my pictures.

I can't say I like neither of these "solutions" (and I assume most people here would agree), but my concern initially was that I was missing some ASP preferences setting, or that it might even be a bug. If my next "correct" move forward would involve buying expensive goods, I feel I'll have to make some compromises.

Or might there be other things I can try?

[afx]

but for now the end result in 99% of the cases will be a simple sRGB JPEG file which inevitably will be viewed in non-color-managed applications on often poorly calibrated screens.

That still does not excuse messing about without any known references....
The number of people who view my online stuff on a calibrated screen is pitifully small.
Still, when I work from a known reference I am at least sure, the stuff I put online is not totally messed up.

If your budget precludes getting a colorimeter, how about asking to borrow one in a nearby photo club? Screens drift, but the drift is usually a lot less than the factory supplied silliness.

Or might there be other things I can try?

The first thing you should try is to see whether a CM aware viewer gets you the same results as AS when using the same profile.
Once that is established, you have a self consistent base. It might be totally off with regards to the rest of the world, but at least you then know that your tools agree.

cheers
afx