sRGB vs. Adobe RGB

[VonClev]

Any advantage to using one color space over the other on the 10D? I currently shoot both JPEG and RAW, use both Elements and CS, and print off an Epson 2200.

Thanks,

[CyberDyneSystems]

Yes.. the advantage goes to Adobe RGB as it simply has a larger amount of colors available.

To take advantage of the benifits of Adobe's color gamut.. you need to do two things.

1. Your image editor must be set to edit in the Adbobe colorspace.

2. Either shoot in RAW OR Set our camera to Adobe RGB and shoot jpeg.


If shooting RAW you may as well leave your camera set to Adobe as well.. even though this won't effect the actual colors captured.. it will tell your image editor that you are shooting in AdobeRGB.

[scottbergerphoto]

Any advantage to using one color space over the other on the 10D? I currently shoot both JPEG and RAW, use both Elements and CS, and print off an Epson 2200.

Thanks,
I use the Epson 2200 and I use the Adobe RGB color space. The color gamut of the Epson 2200 is larger then sRGB. If your image contains colors outside of sRGB, using Adobe RGB will allow you to cature them and get them in your print. sRGB was designed for monitors.
I shoot Raw and convert to 16 bit tiff Adobe RGB or shoot JPEG 10 Adobe RGB, edit in PS CS, set my output to one of the Epson 2200 ICC profiles that came on the install disk in the PIM folder, and set my printer driver to No Color Adjustment.
Regards,
Scott

[defordphoto]

Basic rule: Use sRGB for web. Use AdobeRGB for printing. However, printing depends both on printer itself and software used to print with.

[SnJPhoto]

For those that want to read a bit about color space and color correction to really understand what all these recommendations mean, I would recommend a copy of "The Complete Guide to Digital Color Correction" available at most Barnes and Nobles etc. Its from Lark Books, $39.99.

Its a great referrence book to get the real scoop on what all this color correction is about.

Scott

[defordphoto]

For those that want to read a bit about color space and color correction to really understand what all these recommendations mean, I would recommend a copy of "The Complete Guide to Digital Color Correction" available at most Barnes and Nobles etc. Its from Lark Books, $39.99.

Its a great referrence book to get the real scoop on what all this color correction is about.

Scott

Good reference. It's much, much more complicated than what any one person can know or understand. There are also good references on the Net too.

[VonClev]

Thanks all!

Follow up question: I followed Scott's output advice. I chose the appropriate color space and bit depth, worked in CS, selected appropriate ICC in CS, turned off color management in the Epson print driver. What I was working with in CS looked good and my print output looked as good - but here's the rub - the print preview window, when it came up was way, way too magenta.

Any thoughts? Should I be setting the ICC in the Epson print driver window instead? If so what should I choose as output in CS?

Thanks

Chuck

[who10]

Thanks all!

Follow up question: What I was working with in CS looked good and my print output looked as good - but here's the rub - the print preview window, when it came up was way, way too magenta.

Any thoughts?

Sounds like your Photoshop softproof and print preview settings may be wrong (I'm 90% sure preview uses the profiles configured in "view/proof setup" (I think that's the right menu selection).

This link shows you how to set up soft-proof and "print-with-preview" (you may need to create an Adobe user ID to access the link). Steps 4 and 5 are the ones you may need to look at - you've done the others.

http://studio.adobe.com/us/tips/tip.jsp?p=1&id=512&xml=phs8inkjet


David

[dschwartz69]

Which would you recommend (sRGB or Adobe) if one were sending prints out to a photo shop (i.e. Ritz Camera, etc) or an online service (i.e. Ofoto, Shutterfly, etc.) for printing?

I have an old HP Photosmart P1000 that prints decent 4x6, but the results I get from sending out for prints from my 10D rivals 35mm prints I get from my EOS A2e.

Tips on camera settings for shots that will probably be printed by online service and will also be visible on website?

thanks,

[BAS1]

Thanks all!

Follow up question: I followed Scott's output advice. I chose the appropriate color space and bit depth, worked in CS, selected appropriate ICC in CS, turned off color management in the Epson print driver. What I was working with in CS looked good and my print output looked as good - but here's the rub - the print preview window, when it came up was way, way too magenta.

Any thoughts? Should I be setting the ICC in the Epson print driver window instead? If so what should I choose as output in CS?

Thanks

Chuck

Chuck the magenta color in print preview when color management is turned off is always the case and should be ignored.

Setup color proof and proof colors in PS and turn print preview off in the Epson menus. This tells me that when you saw the magenta in the print preview you did not go ahead and print. If you had, you would see that your print is OK but possibly a tad darker than your monitor. You should set your Epson paper profile up in PS print screen and use that Epson paper profile as the setup in PS/color proof setup.

Bev

[Jesper]

Which would you recommend (sRGB or Adobe) if one were sending prints out to a photo shop (i.e. Ritz Camera, etc) or an online service (i.e. Ofoto, Shutterfly, etc.) for printing?

In my experience, most online printing services don't understand colour management using ICC profiles. Their printing machines expect images in sRGB most of the time, so use sRGB. If you let them print an Adobe RGB file, it will be treated as if it's sRGB and it will look wrong (most notably, the colours will look flat, undersaturated).

If you find a printing service that does understand ICC profiles, they might offer you a profile for their printers. Download and install the profile on your computer and convert your image to the printer's profile before sending the image to them.

[theoldmoose]

Additionally, a number of places that *do* support printer profiles, will expect you *not* to embed the printer profile in the files you send them. A lot of RIPs don't grok embedded profiles, and will make hash of your files. So you should save them in PS with the 'embed profile' box unchecked, and then instruct the service to print them as is on the intended printer, 'with NO modifications'.

That usually gets what you want.

[toddb]

Great thread. So I have a Spider color calibrator. Looks like Adobe automaticly set my "working" color space to my LCD display calibration it just did. So I shoot RAW and my camera is set up to use Adobe RGB. When I open a raw image, I HAD it set up to use my current working space reguardless of what the profile was (Adobe RGB). So I always notice that when I would open the RAW in the Raw converter in Photoshop, my photos would go a little flat. I would adjust them and then save them (not applying the LCD's working color profile).

After reading this, I went to the Adobe site as posted here and set my working space to Adobe RGB and now my pictures have a red ting to them. So my question to you that use a monitor/LCD calibrator, do you keep your "Working color Space" in the profile that your calibrator sets, or do you leave it always in Adobe RGB?

What about output to TV? Should I convert the color space to sRGB there? (Example of doing photo montages on video)

[chuckindetroit]

Acurate Image Manipulation has a great website for color info. Check it out at http://www.aim-dtp.net/aim/

[Jesper]

Great thread. .....

After reading this, I went to the Adobe site as posted here and set my working space to Adobe RGB and now my pictures have a red ting to them. So my question to you that use a monitor/LCD calibrator, do you keep your "Working color Space" in the profile that your calibrator sets, or do you leave it always in Adobe RGB?

See this thread, in which drisley posted some images of dialog boxes in Photoshop and Windows about how to set up colour management: http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=39821

Does your calibration software really set Photoshop's working space to the monitor profile, or are we confused about the term "working space" here? The "working space" is what you set in Photoshop, not what you set in Windows Display Properties.

Do not set your working space in Photoshop to the device-specific profile of your monitor. If you do that, you are saving your images in the colour space of your monitor, which means they will only look exactly right on your monitor and nowhere else. Use a standard colour space such as Adobe RGB for your working space and set the monitor profile in Windows display properties (right-click on desktop, Properties, Settings, Advanced, Colour management).

It's possible that the images you adjusted while you used your monitor profile as your working space in PS now look wrong, because you've adjusted them with the wrong colour management settings. You can do this to correct them:

1. If there's no embedded profile in the images, first assign the monitor colour space by choosing Image / Mode / Assign Profile. Choose the monitor profile in the drop-down box and click OK. The image should now look OK on screen.

2. Now convert it to Adobe RGB by choosing Image / Mode / Convert to Profile. Choose Adobe RGB as the target profile.

3. Save your image.

[toddb]

Does your calibration software really set Photoshop's working space to the monitor profile, or are we confused about the term "working space" here? The "working space" is what you set in Photoshop, not what you set in Windows Display Properties.


It's been a while, I only remember disabling Adobe Gama. I have notice a red cast on some of the images now that I am in the Adobe RGB work space again. I thought they were corrected correctly. Thanks allot for setting me straight. I should have known though....everytime I adjusted my image in the Raw converter in PS CS, I notice the picture going flat when it opened up. That should have clued me in....but I didn't catch it. I better get that book and really understand this from camera to print before I cause any more damage.

Now I question every scanned image I have ever done as well. I think from now on I will just scan in images with all auto exposure/correction turned off. I should be fine if I scan in 48bit mode, should provide me with allot of info to correct and make my own exposure changes.

Some day I'll have some L glass and I won't have to worry as much of having to do allot of corrections.

http://www.toddburke.net/forumpost/10D_color_correction.jpg

[VonClev]

BAS, who 10 and all:

Bas - I've actually done it both ways - with the ICC set in CS and off in the Epson Print Driver and vice versa. Regardless, the print preview comes out red, but the hard prints off the Epson2200 (either way) come out just fine.

Who10 - The link was great, but still didn't fix the problem.

Which begs the question - why is the Preview so worthless? If everybody sees magenta in it while working with their files what good is it? Does anybody out there not see red in the Print Preview Window? Could my monitor profile be off?

Thanks!

Chuck

[theoldmoose]

One item that might help, would be to start using 'ProPhotoRGB' as your working space, instead of AdobeRGB. AdobeRGB is limited in its gamut, as compared to some printer gamuts. So, if you are working in AdobeRGB and try to proof with some printer profile, on an (admittedly) limited gamut almost-sRGB monitor, you probably won't really see much of interest.

At least, if you use ProPhotoRGB, which is a wide-open gamut color space, you won't get truncations/scalings when converting through your working space to proof items for your printer.

Might help, or it might not. Based on advice I've seen in the "Real World Camera RAW" book by Bruce Fraser, I'm going to start working in 16-bit ProPhotoRGB as much as possible.

And, if I'm going to continue to use PhaseOne's CaptureOne, I'll have to upgrade to a version that will let me pick something beside AdobeRGB or sRGB for an output profile. I believe that it will have to be at least SE, if not Pro :(

[Jesper]

And, if I'm going to continue to use PhaseOne's CaptureOne, I'll have to upgrade to a version that will let me pick something beside AdobeRGB or sRGB for an output profile. I believe that it will have to be at least SE, if not Pro :(

I don't know which version of CaptureOne you are using, but I have CaptureOne LE and I can choose any output colour space I want, it's not limited to Adobe RGB or sRGB.

[theoldmoose]

Thanks. I'm still using the Digital Rebel 1.3.1 version, and it limits you to only sRGB or AdobeRGB.

I'm waiting for a more bug-free release than 3.5, and since none of the older upgrade versions are available, like 1.3.1 LE, I'm stuck with the DR version until then.

[Jesper]

See this thread: C1 v3.5.1 for Windows released (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=40258). I just downloaded and installed it, at least one of the bug I had noticed is still there. :( Too bad it has a number of annoying little issues, C1 is a really nice piece of software.

[theoldmoose]

:evil:

Durn, burn it. How many folks have to tell those guys in Denmark that we want it to WORK, first of all, then they can add all the neat gizmos?

For me, a solid workflow, with good image rendition is what I need, but P1 has managed to bungle every release so far, by bowing to the temptation to load their software with new features (and/or new camera support) rather than fix the absolute boatload of bugs that folks have complained about.

I'm really disappointed. Michael, et al, were promising everyone that if they patiently waited for the 3.5.1 release, that all known bugs would be fixed. Now I see that they have placed most of the promised bug fixes in a newly-minted 3.6 release. And they still think they are releasing a major 4.0 upgrade in October. Anyone want to bet that they: a) are late, and that b) it really stinks up the place?

Once again, P1 has thumbed their nose at their customers, in favor of attempting to bring in new business.
:roll:

[Jesper]

Durn, burn it. How many folks have to tell those guys in Denmark that we want it to WORK, first of all, then they can add all the neat gizmos?
Well, it does WORK, but it just has a few minor annoyances. You'd say things like the Metering Mode bugs are small things that they could fix quickly, but obviously that's not where they have their priorities when developing the software.

The minor annoyances are not something that make the program unusable.

[VonClev]

BAS1

Followed your advice - I now appreciate the larger color space that Prophoto RGB allows - but it still doesn't fix the red cast I have in print preview. Again both my screen, soft proof, and printed output look good. Seems like an annoying glitch that nobody has an answer for.

Thanks all for your help anyhow - I did learn some things on the way!

Chuck