Adjust for sRGB after shooting Adobe RGB

Yeah, I did the 2.2 gamma as well. I think it is just a question of me being used to the old setup. My eyes have to adjust. But my computer is on the dark side and on its last days. I'll probably be picking up a Mactel this week, so I'll be starting with a fresh new screen.

Thanks!

ETA: Oops...mised the D50 option. This one is even more yellow. I think I'll plug in my peecee laptop to remind me what ugly really is.

Ahhh, a clean slate and a new monitor. Right on!

When you calibrate and profile your new monitor try producing profiles with various combinations of settings and try them to see what is going on. Excellent educational endeavour that takes little time.

Another test piece is to get your color management all set up and create a blank, white, document in PS and then hold up a white card or several stacked pieces of paper(to prevent back-lighting) and compare the card or paper white to what you percieve on the screen. Try switching out the various monitor profiles you created(if you tried the above exercise) and see how this affects what you see on screen.

Cheers!

Calibrating a screen to D50 can, perversely, produce worse paper to print matching results than calibrating to D65. You have to remember that a screen and photographic paper viewed under a D50 lightbox are two different things. A screen calibrated to D50 can tend to be rather dim, too.

More on this subject can be found here.


If you've been calibrating your screen to a higher colour temperature (bluer) white balance, then your monitor will look rather yellow to you for a while. The effect will soon go off - your eyes adjust for white balance in the end! Most monitors are set to be very blue "out of the box" - 9300K is not an unusual setting.

David

DavidW wrote:
Calibrating a screen to D50 can, perversely, produce worse paper to print matching results than calibrating to D65. You have to remember that a screen and photographic paper viewed under a D50 lightbox are two different things. A screen calibrated to D50 can tend to be rather dim, too.

More on this subject can be found here.


If you've been calibrating your screen to a higher colour temperature (bluer) white balance, then your monitor will look rather yellow to you for a while. The effect will soon go off - your eyes adjust for white balance in the end! Most monitors are set to be very blue "out of the box" - 9300K is not an unusual setting.

David

David,

You may be right in theory but maybe not in practice. It realy depends, as you kind of point out, upon the ambient lighting in the viewing area.

I suggested producing several profiles using different settings so that Sageg could get a very good feel of which combination would work best for the particular situ. Nothing is a substitute for direct experimentation.

The D65 profile could be the best for the situ. But then again maybe not....

I personally use 2 different profiles for one of our adjusting stations. Both are gama 2.2 but one id D50 and one is D65. If I'm adjusting for prepress I use the D65 and a D50 illuminant, if I'm adjusting for prints to be hung in a home or gallery I'll sometimes use the D50 profile.

As you say, there's no entirely right answer here. It would be easy if you calibrated to D50, used a D50 lightbox and everything matched. It's not that easy, and you're quire right - a bit of trial and error is called for to see what does give you the best match. I still regard monitor calibration to D65, gamma 2.2 as standard, but you give a case when deviating from that standard is called for. I'd join in you recommending a bit of experimentation.

Color correction, calibration and profiling isn't too hard when you get your head around it, but when you're trying to get hold of the concepts (which is most important when you're first trying to get your system correct), it can be awfully hard.

David

David,

I'd go allong with you saying that 2.2 and D65 is a loose standard.

As a side note...

It just dumped about 12'' to 16'' of the light fluff and the clouds finally broke.
Damn bright out. No sungalsses either.
When I came back from lunch and looked at the monitor, it seemed quite yellow at first, but now it is beginning to come back to white.

Well, snow is blue. Or brown. Sometimes yellow.

I'm enjoying reading your back-and-forth. One of the best ways to learn!

I better not go there
Especially with my dog...

You are correct!

Soft proof, soft proof, SOFT PROOF! When working on an image in default PS's workspace (AdobeRGB), depending on your final output. Per say, this is for Web, SOFTPROOF against the Windows Monitor profile and the Mac monitor profile and also the sRGB profile.

That's the whole point of ICC workflow and soft-proofing. Getting your final output to look the way you want. This doesn't mean it comes automatic!

Ok I'm still new and really confused about color space. I just sent test prints to whcc and in their instructions it says if you don't kno which color space to imbed choose srgb so I did. Should I be using Adobe RGB since PS is converting from Adobe RGB anyways?

I'm more interested in what my pictures look like printed.

Negative! Unless this place gives you an ICC file to soft proof. You are going to tag/convert all your files to srgb.

Is your monitor calibrated? No...?? don't even worry about color management. If yes... here is a simple workflow

if your workspace is AdobeRGB, and your camera files are SRGB, the first thing PS will tell you is that it is mismatch. You'll have 3 options. In case of a file is already tagged sRGB, I will work under this space...make all edits and save

If you are workflowing from ProPhoto, I convert down to AdobeRGB. Make all adjustment and post-processing. once the final is ready Convert to sRGB, and save file, and send it to your printing place

If the file is already tagged AdobeRGB, it won't ask for anything. You should do everything you need (post-processing), and than CONVERT to sRGB.

If your printing house DOES have ICC profiles, than the workflow is different.