Frames, mattes and profiles

[tonygamble]

I mentioned this on the normal PWP forum as I did not realise this beta one existed. It seems relevant to the testing of the beta so please forgive the double post.

I had been having problems importing files converted from RAW into the frame/matte system. Some worked fine. Some immediately became flat and dull.

OK, I now see where the problem is coming from.

The shots that differ when they go into a frame have got some form of profile embedded in the tif or jpg. I use Qimage to convert my RAWs (sorry DLC!) and they come over with info like Panasonic DMC-GH3 Qimage V3 or Canon 5D- Qimage V3.

They look fine whilst I manipulate them in PWP but when I put them into a frame they become 'weak'.

I have just re-converted some RAWs using Qimage and embedding them as sRGB's and now the framed and matted images are as vibrant as the unframed ones.

I'm not aware that working them with these sRGB profiles is going to create problems so that is the way forward for me.

I have no idea how hard it would be to get the frame/matte system to tolerate those embedded profiles. If it is easy then it might avoid a bit of confusion to incorporate it.

Tony

[jsachs]

Thanks for tracking that down - we should be able to fix the problem.

[jsachs]

This should be fixed for the next beta release.

You might want to check your Color Management settings for On Profile Mismatch. Setting it to Ask Only on Mismatch will alert you if you try to open a file not in the working color space and offer to convert it for you which would have prevented this problem. In any case, Mat will now automatically create a copy of the input image converted to the working color space and use that instead of the original input image.

[tonygamble]

Thanks Jonathan.

Tony

[tonygamble]

Just to add that I have printed five photos with bevelled mattes and put them into Lion Acrylic frames.

To me they look like genuine card mattes.

They are going into an exhibition next week. It will be interesting to see who is fooled and who spots the 'trick'.

Apart from saving expense and time it has given me great flexibity to be able to match the matte and the bevel to the colours that best suit the image.

I resisted the temptation to emulate a frame as I was pretty sure that would spoil the illusion.

It's a great add-on Jonathan. Well done.

Tony

[Dieter Mayr]

Jonathan,

would a copy in the working colorspace really solve the problem ?
Mat & Frame is not color managed, so a picture in lets say Chrome2000D65 looks weak even in Chorme200 D65 working space.
When I convert the image to sRGB it looks OK in Matt & Frame.
So would a conversion to sRGB insted of the working CS be the better way? (or make Matt and Frame full color managed, of course.
I have made a set of screenshots which I send to you per email because of their size.

[jsachs]

I fixed the problem with the Mat preview image not being properly color managed. The mat result image is always created in the working color space, but the preview was not being converted to the monitor color space before being displayed.

[andrewh]

One tiny other Mat issue.

I change the size of the image in the Mat transformation to, say 12" @ 300 dpi
I save the completed frame, mat and image
I open the resize transformation
The image is now 72" @ 100 dpi (should be 24@300 including wall, frame, outer and inner mats)

Of course it is easy to change but I suspect that this is not intended behaviour
Andrew

[jsachs]

This is fixed in the next beta.