here are the other two screen shots, the forum only allows so much data to be uploaded so I needed to split it.

Thanks for the response. The settings are absolute in both Qimage and Photoshop so even if I am rendering in a non-conventional way then they should both be the same. The second post has the screenshot of the Photoshop settings I used for print.

Benny, I cannot really know without you sending me the profile, but what I am guessing, is that ABSOLUTE is a no no setting for photos unless it is a tattoo with a color.   It is possible, seen it before, that PS is ignoring the AC setting and using perceptual.
Please try setting the rendering intent to RC in Qimage and see what kind of print you get.

Fred

You'd better read this article that Mike wrote some time ago.
Your problem is an "old chestnut" and probably related to using the correct settings in QU, hence Mike wrote the article.

http://ddisoftware.com/tech/articles/may-2011-printing-the-same-colors-in-qimage-ultimate-and-photoshop/

Terry

Sounds like it could be a mal-formed profile but I'd need the profile to examine it to be sure.  Wouldn't be the first time I've seen that from a profile creation tool.  Qimage follows the ICC specification even if a profile has corrupted tables or conflicting data (like bad black points, etc).  Photoshop is known to prune profiles if it finds bad or conflicting data in the profiles and it can even ignore the profile completely if it "sees something it doesn't like" in the profile.  There are pros and cons to the "pruning" approach.  Sometimes it can correct bad LUTs and make the profile look better.  Sometimes it can actually make it look worse or cause it to be ignored entirely (without warning).  The main problem with that approach is you never really know what it's doing as there is no indication (from PS) that it just did something to try to fix a bad profile.

So basically the only time you'll see a difference in color between QU and PS is if either the settings are different or the profile is corrupted internally.

Regards,
Mike

Benny,
Of course we can have a look in the profile.
Mike asked you to send it to him, and I asked you to send it to me too. I even put my email address in my post for you.
wathree.ssz@verizon.net

Waiting....
Fred

Thanks for the profile; Fred gave me a copy to test.  I've now done all comparisons (Perceptual, Relative Colorimetric, and Absolute Colorimetric) with BPC both on, then off for each.  For each setting (chosen rendering intent and BPC), both test sets had identical color between QU and Photoshop when using a very challenging profile testing image, so the profile is fine.

So now that we know QU is sending the same color data to the driver (as PS) when using this profile, we are down to QU/driver settings.  If there is a difference (even with Absolute Colorimetric), the difference is being caused by either the color management settings being different (rendering intent and BPC) or a difference in driver settings.  Perhaps in the driver settings, color management isn't turned off in QU and it is in PS (or vice versa).  But there is a difference somewhere in that driver if you are sure you made the same selections for rendering intent and BPC in both.

With that said, keep in mind that there are a few other things that can make images look different in QU since it allows filters:

(1) If you edited the image in QU, it could have an associative filter that won't be read by PS.
(2) If you have a global filter or print filter active (on the Settings tab) in QU, that can affect color.
(3) If QU is reading a different embedded profile than PS.

Although I've never seen #3 happen, you can check this by hovering your mouse cursor over the thumbnail for the image and looking at the status bar at the bottom of the QU main window: it'll show you what profile is embedded in the image.  You can compare that to the color space that PS reports when you open the image.

Regards,
Mike