Originally posted by following.eric ...They also have all their icc profiles available for download and I have chosen Matt as I prefer the look, but it's a bit hard to soft proof as the image changes quite a bit. Changes colour a bit and makes it flat for sure. It's almost like reworking a whole new edit.
Any tips for this? Also the jpeg export after proof seem then the complete opposite, but I have to trust the system that when they print they will look like the simulated paper.
Check what the lab expects from your image data.
Do they require you to size to final print size at say 300 ppi?
As you have downloaded the ICC profile for your choice of paper I assume that they require you to embedd this profile?
As long as the colour management chain is honoured by you and the lab then your simulated paper proof view should be very close to a final print.
It is expected that the soft proof of the image will not match the view of the monitor image using a before after comparison. Additionally your choice of Matt will have a huge effect on the way the image appears both on screen and in the final print. It is highly likely that you will not be able to match the contrast and hue of the original screen view anywhere near.
So a tip - change paper surface to something that can match the contrast and density ranges of your image data. If you must use Matt then lower your expectations of a screen match by a large margin and do not bother trying to compare.
Attached is a typical example of Matt paper vs desired appearance compared to a Lustre paper vs desired appearance. Both may need final tweaking to get closer to original however the Matt paper will not really respond to an acceptable (for me!) result compared to Lustre. The Lustre surface here wil respond very well to a tweak to Hue & Sat and possibly Contrast/Clarity