Which color space?

[cruzyn56]

My 20d has 2 options for color space: sRGB and Adobe RGB. The manual pretty much says to stick with sRGB if you are not skilled at post processing. Some magazine articles I have read recommend the Adobe RGB as the better one to use. A couple of questions?

Is one better over the other for printing photos?

Does the color space affect raw images? I notice that the file name for sRGB is IMG_xxx.jpg or cr2 and for Adobe RGB it is _MG_xxx.jpg or cr2.

Thanks,

[Craig Schwartz]

My 20d has 2 options for color space: sRGB and Adobe RGB. The manual pretty much says to stick with sRGB if you are not skilled at post processing. Some magazine articles I have read recommend the Adobe RGB as the better one to use. A couple of questions?
Is one better over the other for printing photos?
Does the color space affect raw images? I notice that the file name for sRGB is IMG_xxx.jpg or cr2 and for Adobe RGB it is _MG_xxx.jpg or cr2.
Thanks,

Well....Adobe RGB is a wider color space (it's what I use) and might be best if your manipulating and printing your own photos. sRGB is what you might use if your photos are going to be placed on the web. sRGB's color space is MUCH shorter. It doesn't "see" the wide gamut of colors (color gradations) that your camera sees and your printer might be capable of reproducing.

The downside of Adobe RGB is that your camera will capture colors that your printer is not capable of reproducing. That's called "Going out of Gamut." Although you correct for that, It's a pain!

If your going to shoot raw and print your own photos, than Adobe RGB is your best bet. Learn how to deal with the occasional "Gamut" problem and you'll be a happy camper. Just make sure that if your using Photoshop that you set the color space correctly (Adobe RGB1998 is the color space that I use.)

I hope this isn't too confusing.

Craig

[scottbergerphoto]

As already said, Adobe RGB is a larger color space and is my preferred space for my cameras and my working space in PS CS. Many of todays high end ink jet printers like the Epson 2200 have the ability to print outside the sRGB color space. I suggest that you shoot Adobe RGB, edit in PS CS in Adobe RGB and then if the image is for the web or a lab to print, convert to sRGB. If you are printing at home as I do, leave it as Adobe RGB.

If you are using an editing application that is not color managed (doesn't recognize color spaces), shoot sRGB until you get an application that does.
Scott

[PhotosGuy]

Think of it as starting editing with a full cup of information in AdobeRGB. sRGB = 1/2 cup. If you adjust in levels, etc., you spill some pic info out.
You probably won't see much difference in small prints. OTOH, you spent a lot of money on high quality equipment - why not take advantage of all it can give you?

[scottbergerphoto]

Think of it as starting editing with a full cup of information in AdobeRGB. sRGB = 1/2 cup. If you adjust in levels, etc., you spill some pic info out.
You probably won't see much difference in small prints. OTOH, you spent a lot of money on high quality equipment - why not take advantage of all it can give you?
I like the analogy!
Scott

[Mike Panic]

before you choose - how are you printing and what is your printer or lab using?

[ScottE]

Why not take some identical photos and make prints using both colour spaces? Then you can compare for yourself.

If you can't see much or any difference it doesn't really matter which you use.

Scott

[PhotosGuy]

Why not take some identical photos and make prints using both colour spaces? Then you can compare for yourself.
If you can't see much or any difference it doesn't really matter which you use.
WHAT? Actually DO IT? :D:D:D Isn't that like the guy who asks "what's the difference between f-4 & f-16 who can't be bothered to take a pic with his $1,000 cam & look at the difference?
(Sorry... I get carried away sometimes) :o

[karusel]

You're right. I know I'm lazy in this regard... But, I intend to purchase EPSON 2100 (2200) and I'll test it then.

But I've been reading about this adobe RGB vs sRGB dilemma some time ago, unfortunately I forgot where.. I recall this one thing from it: if you're not sure you need adobe RGB, you don't need it. :D Apparently the differences are really negligible, so hey, why bother? It's pretty much the same as the 16 bit graphics - which in my opinion are very useful only when torturing image to extremes, like, brightening it and unsharp masking, etc...

[cruzyn56]

before you choose - how are you printing and what is your printer or lab using?
Photos are printed from online services or a lab such as Costco.

[MadMesh]

I print at costco too,... and i dont know which is the better color space? I went to dry creek and got all the ICC printer profiles. Any sudgestions as to Adobr or sRGB for costco prints?

[tim]

Read this (http://www.shootsmarter.com/images/sRGB.gif). Registration is free and it's a great site.

[Rigrider]

if you really are intrested in this colour managment stuff I have 1 recomendation for you. Pick up Bruce Frasers Real World Color Management!!!!!!!! The thing would hold down a house in a tornado, but it's well worth it if you're at all serious about printing.

L8r,

[kram]

Is there a diff. in file size between sRGB and Adobe RGB?

[RafaPolit]

Read this. Registration is free and it's a great site.

This was a link to a GIF rather than an HTML file http://photography-on-the.net//forum/images/smilies/icon_biggrin.gif, but you're right, it is a good site, you can enter here (http://shootsmarter.com/index.html) and suscribe, the link is there very clear under the name: sRGB vs Adobe RGB: The Truth.

My father (rPolitSr in this forum) found another site of great technological info as well as awesome tutorials:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm

This site explains the color spaces and gives great advice on situations when you'll need one or the other, with one very interesting question (and its answer!): Since the Adobe RGB 1998 working space clearly provides more color to work with, why not just use it in every situation?

Hope this helps,

Rafael Pólit (jr.)
Quito, Ecuador.

[arunchs]

To keep as little techie as possible:

If you would like to shoot to take print outs, aRGB is better. If you want to shoot for hosting on the web/emailing etc, sRGB is better.

In fact it is a simple step to convert profiles in photoshop. So the best thing to do is shoot is adobe RGB so your picture can have more colors in it. Then, beased on whether you are going to print it or display on the web, convert to sRGB or any other profile.

[scottbergerphoto]

In fact it is a simple step to convert profiles in photoshop. So the best thing to do is shoot is adobe RGB so your picture can have more colors in it. Then, beased on whether you are going to print it or display on the web, convert to sRGB or any other profile.
Exactly!
I shoot Adobe RGB and my working space is Adobe RGB. If I need sRGB:
Image>Mode>Convert to Profile>sRGB (CS, CS2 is a little different).

[karusel]

That's all really nice, but in my Photoshop I fail to see a noticeable difference between a sRGB developed shot and an Adobe RGB one - each of course opened up in their color space. True, not two pixels are of exact same color, but overall it looks very much the same, even 16 bit TIFF Adobe RGB vs. 8 bit HQ JPEG sRGB doesn't show any really visible difference. So hey...?

[RafaPolit]

Karusel,

Thats the idea of color profiles in the first place, you shoot in one or the other, and the software interprets each space so it can reproduce color in a faithful way, so probably any picture correctly interpreted would yield very similar results in screen or print.

Converting the spaces after shooting realy has no effect on the look of the picture, just in the way one or the other medium (name it screen, printer, press, etc.) will interpret the colors, so the profile must match this requirements, it wont increase the gamut (going form sRGB to aRBG) and it will compress the gamut a little bit in the other way, but probably none of us would notice it unless one meassures pixel by pixel the RGB values.

Shooting in one or the other spaces might yield some diferrent results, but consider the following: its true that AdobeRGB has more color volume, but as the link for cambridgeincolour (http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm) I gave in my last post explains, if your subject fits entirely into the sRGB scope (pure theoreticaly speaking), shooting in AdobeRGB will only be wasting bits of your available bitdepth (less noticeable in 16bit, more noticeable in 8bit) and therefore reducing your pictures overall color range, which is somewhat counterintuitive to the notion of more color volume. So in that case, you will be reducing the quality by shooting in a more wide gamut range :confused: .

I think its all about whats been repeated several times: print - go with Adobe RGB, screen or web in general - sRGB. Not know which? go with sRGB. ;)

Rafael Pólit (jr.)
Quito, Ecuador.

[slin100]

Think of it as starting editing with a full cup of information in AdobeRGB. sRGB = 1/2 cup. If you adjust in levels, etc., you spill some pic info out.

It may be more accurate to think of AdobeRGB as 3/4 cup. The gamut of the 20D, for example, is about the same size as Prophoto RGB.

You probably won't see much difference in small prints. OTOH, you spent a lot of money on high quality equipment - why not take advantage of all it can give you?
Right. For maximum control, RAW shooters should use Prophoto as the working space because it provides the maximum control over color space conversions. And use 16-bit to minimize posterization effects that can occur with using 8-bit in such a large space, as indicated by RafaPolit.

[R1 Kid]

So So So much info is posted out there on this subject. My advise is to shoot Adobe RGB. Edit in Adobe RGB and completely forget abou sRGB. It use to make more difference before monitors & equipment in general were so advanced. But from what I've read in most books and seen. It's very slim that anyone would ever be able to tell the difference without a side by side comparison. Even then as most have found out, the difference is very very little.

Please don't think I am trying to be rude. This is simply how I view this subject.

[scottbergerphoto]

So So So much info is posted out there on this subject. My advise is to shoot Adobe RGB. Edit in Adobe RGB and completely forget abou sRGB. It use to make more difference before monitors & equipment in general were so advanced. But from what I've read in most books and seen. It's very slim that anyone would ever be able to tell the difference without a side by side comparison. Even then as most have found out, the difference is very very little.

Please don't think I am trying to be rude. This is simply how I view this subject.
It's pretty easy to tell the difference between an image in sRGB and AdobeRGB in a non color managed application like Internet Explorer. Adobe RGB images will appear dull and washed out. I always convert to sRGB before saving for the web.

[John W]

This to let you know, the Canon i960 and the Pixima series printers can print the extended gamut of the Adobe color space (aRGB).