Colour management .. help!!

No, the greater majority of monitors are at or around sRGB

Monitors can be either AdobeRGB or sRGB depending how the monitor is callibrated.

The monitor profile is quite different to sRGB (which is a colour space, not a device profile). In camera colour space has no bearing if he shoots in raw anyway.

The monitor profile is generated when the monitor is callibrated and used by the OS. The profile will be different depending on what color space is used - AdobeRGB or sRGB. In camera color space should be the same as the monitor color space. I'm unclear aboout your statement that in camera color space is unimportant because the OP is shooting in RAW.

Generally for pro-sumer printers, the canned profiles are pretty close when used with OEM papers. I tend to think the issue here is more of a ink age, print head issue

I agree.

Every monitor, like every other imaging device, has its own unique color space. It may be close to sRGB for a "standard" monitor or close to Adobe RGB for a "wide gamut" monitor, nevertheless it will almost never be exactly one or the other, because the chance of a physical device exactly fitting an abstract mathematical model (which is what sRGB and Abode RGB are) is very remote. That is why we calibrate/profile monitors, to produce profiles that describe those unique spaces.

When shooting Raw the camera color space setting has no relevance because it applies only to camera-made jpgs. A Raw file is not a color image (RGB) file. It is no more than a greyscale image and the creation of color is part of the processing it must go through in the Raw conversion software. Since it has no color it can have no color space. The translation of the Raw data into the framework of a recognized and standardized color space is also part of that processing which will create a jpg or tiff.

tzalman wrote in post #16338401
Every monitor, like every other imaging device, has its own unique color space. It may be close to sRGB for a "standard" monitor or close to Adobe RGB for a "wide gamut" monitor, nevertheless it will almost never be exactly one or the other, because the chance of a physical device exactly fitting an abstract mathematical model (which is what sRGB and Abode RGB are) is very remote. That is why we calibrate/profile monitors, to produce profiles that describe those unique spaces.

When shooting Raw the camera color space setting has no relevance because it applies only to camera-made jpgs. A Raw file is not a color image (RGB) file. It is no more than a greyscale image and the creation of color is part of the processing it must go through in the Raw conversion software. Since it has no color it can have no color space. The translation of the Raw data into the framework of a recognized and standardized color space is also part of that processing which will create a jpg or tiff.

I understand your RAW comment. Thank you.

notastockpikr wrote in post #16338311
Monitors can be either AdobeRGB or sRGB depending how the monitor is callibrated.

The monitor profile is generated when the monitor is callibrated and used by the OS. The profile will be different depending on what color space is used - AdobeRGB or sRGB. In camera color space should be the same as the monitor color space.

No. Gamut of the monitor is nothing to do with it's calibration/profiling.

The act of calibration/profiling examines what the monitor can produce under it luminance & gamma conditions, adjusts it's LUT to more accurately produce the correct colour when it is asked to do so.

The monitor profiles have no bearing on what the monitors colour gamut is capable of producing i.e. a standard monitor with around a sRGB gamut cannot be "calibrated/profiled" to produce a AdobeRGB colour gamut.

The camera colour space has nothing to do with the monitor colour space, two totally independant things.

There is a school of thought that it is better to have your monitor colour space to be similar or just slightly larger than your possible output gamut. Be-it for the web or in print. I tend to agree with this train of thought.

tzalman wrote in post #16337669
With six colors, most likely CMYK plus light M and light C, I would expect it to exceed sRGB and Adobe RGB (1998) would be the appropriate working space for any image with a wide range of greens and blues, such as landscapes, nature, etc.

In addition to the six colors mentioned above the R2880 adds two shades of grey pigment (light black and light light black). Again, Adobe RGB would be the best working space. The R1900 (which I have) uses either C/M/Y/K-photo or C/M/Y/K-matte plus the addition of red and orange, which extends its gamut significantly in the orange and yellow directions beyond Adobe RGB, as can be seen below, and I would recommend therefore a wider working space like ProPhoto RGB or Chrome 2000 RGB.

The R800/R1800 only has a smallish area outside aRGB