sRGB or AdobeRGB?

Good point Leo.

Scott, try opening a TIFF of a bright colorful image. Do your processing, and then Save For Web as you usually do. Leave the TIFF open, and then open that JPG, and when it asks about a profile be sure to Assign it sRGB (since that's how people on the web will see it).

Do they look the same?

I just reviewed the 16 bit tiffs and corresponding jpegs for web I shot for my Christmas 2004 gallery. They look identical. I tell PS to leave the jpeg images un color managed when I open them. Then, If I assign them sRGB they look dull. So, why is it that when I post them in PBASE or open them without color mgmt. do they look identical to the tiffs?
Scott

That's a good question Scott. I really don't know why it works for you.

The top image was Adobe RGB, converted to sRGB, then Saved for Web, ICC unchecked.
The bottom image was Adobe RGB, no conversion done, then Saved for Web, ICC unchecked.

This image demonstrates what happens when you view an Adobe RGB image in sRGB space. The original image was captured and processed in Adobe RGB.

The top is sRGB; Adobe RGB below

HTTP response: 500

Scottes -

In your example, the correctly converted image (from Adobe RGB to sRGB) has more intense yellows and reds. The greens are slightly brighter. The sky is almost neutral - so you don't see a difference. (At least, that's what I see on my monitor.) All moderately to well saturated colors will be less vivid if they are not converted.

Do you see what I see?

Scott, when I was viewing your Xmas images a couple of days ago, there was something about them that I just couldn't place my finger on. All the shots looked good, yet "different". Now I know what it is. I just downloaded two of your images (I hope you don't mind) and made 3 copies of each. I then loaded each one into PS. I assigned the first of the set a profile of Adobe RGB, the 2nd sRGB and the third as unmanaged.

The Adobe RGB and unmanaged pictures looked identical to each other. That's because by default, my PS working space is Adobe RGB. The sRGB ones were different but they looked exactly like what I see posted on PBase. But, when you compare the Adobe RGB pictures against the sRGB pictures, the Adobe RGB pictures look much more natural. The reds are bright as are the golds on the ribbon on the Xmas tree. In other words, they look more natural compared to the ones posted on the web.

I'll post a sample crop of the wall and the Xmas tree to illustrate the different (in another thread).

I'm now going to delete the pictures I downloaded in case you did mind and accept my apology.

Right ... they should look dull when viewed in the wrong color space. That you already know. (sRGB captured images would look brighter if viewed in Adobe RGB space.)

Your PBASE images (beautiful!) are mounted against dark backgrounds, if I recall correctly. (PBase is having server problems - can't review them right now). Usually one edits in Photoshop against a neutral gray background. Your vision may be tricking you. Black backgrounds tend to make images "pop."

Yes, that's exactly what I see. I couldn't find an image with any bright cyans.

OK, actually I was too lazy to find one...

Here are the differences I was talking about:

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

HTTP response: 404 | MIME changed to 'text/html' | Byte size: ZERO

Scottes, Leo, Maderito, Thank you for your explanations. Leo, thank you for your efforts posting my images. I can't however tell the difference between the pictures you posted. I'm going to compare the images I have posted side by side with new ones made from the original tiffs made by converting to sRGB before saving for web. I'll get back to ya!
Have a Happy New Year,
Scott

I redid all the pictures in my Christmas 2004 gallery by first saving to sRGB. Leo, Scottes, Maderito, you were all right. The new jpeg's are brighter and more colorful.
Thanks and Happy New Year,
Scott

Can someone enlighten me how we do this conversion from Adobe 1998 to sRGB? I've noticed a color shift when I save for web as well...would be great if what I'm working on in Photoshop would show up exactly like that when I post it on the web.

In Photoshop CS it's in the bottom of the Image / Adjustment menu. Can't check it right now because I don't have Photoshop here. Photoshop Elements does not have this feature.

In Photoshop 6,7,CS: Image>Mode>Convert to Profile:

Source space: should say Adobe RGB if that's where you started
Destination space: choose sRGB

Options: Use ACE (doesn't really matter) conversion engine and check "black point compensation" and "dither". For intent, use "relative colometric" - although some suggest "perceptual".

Use the preview button. Your goal is to see minimal or no difference before and after the conversion. That's the point of the conversion: to map the color numbers from Adobe color space to equivalent numbers (or the best approximation) in sRGB color space.

When you finish, all the color numbers of your starting mage have been changed. You should save the converted file under a different name or in a different folder. Use "Save As" or "Save for Web." Optionally, you can attach the sRGB ICC profile while saving, although it's really not necessary when saving for web viewing.

The above's really helpful.

In my 20D manual, they write:

"For normal images, sRGB is recommended."
and
"Adobe RGB... is mainly used for commercial printing and other industrial uses. This setting is not recommended if you do not know about image processing, Adobe RGB, and Design rule for Camera File System 2.0 (Exif 2.21). Since the image will look very subdued with sRGB personal computers and printers not compatible with Design rule for Camera File System 2.0 (Exif 2.21), post-processing of the image with software will be required."

Why do they make these statements?
Does it have anything to do with shooting in RAW vs JPG? Does shooting in Adobe RGB matter less for the latter?

Kevin.