Printing images taken in aRGB

Hello folks.
I've been reading a lot of the threads here about color management and I'm puzzled about something. If I understand correctly:
1) A lot of people use aRGB when they plan to print their pictures rather than put them on the web because it has a wider gamut than sRGB. (Thus "better" colors in their prints.)
2) Most monitors can't see the entire range of colors in aRGB.

We put a lot of time and energy into calibration and profiling so that our prints will match (as much as possible) what we see on screen. But if the monitor can't show the entire range of colors in an aRGB image, how can your monitor and your print ever come close?

I'm sure I'm missing something; what is it?
Thanks

You are right that most (all?) monitors cannot display the full aRGB gamut, although some are better than others.

My own take on this is that my printer can and does print 99.9% of the aRGB gamut so printing in sRGB is making do with less than I can get. The minor inconvenience of not seeing it on the monitor is a price worth paying.

Whether its worth worrying about I'm less sure about. I've never printed any comparison images so just don't know. The honest answer is probably not.

I printed a few times in ARGB with dismal results. I now shoot exclusively SRGB and prints come out fine.

http://mpix.com/suppor​t/Help.aspx?id=3

I print from PS7, which is only 8 bit, but once or twice I've printed direct from DPP at 16 bit and my results have been perfectly OK. Can I assume the quote was from a commercial lab?

Why sRGB? Easy, its the lowest common demoninator. Thats not exactly high praise though.

Yeah not sure what that's about because I just checked some jpegs right out of DPP and they said 24bit and they print fine. Yes that quote was from MPIX, which is a popular US-based lab.

/Can of worms:

The idea behind soft-proofing is to gain some sense of what will happen to your image when it gets to the printer. It is worth remembering that the gamut for printers is normally restricted to CMYK with one or two so-called photoprinters adding light cyan and light magenta to ameliorate the half-toning common with CMYK. (or very occasionally; the now abandoned Pantone Hexachrome inks... colloquially known as CMYKOG for commercial print processes)

RGB is additive colour and it is a mixture of light, which transilluminates the displayed screen image. CMYK is subtractive colour and it is viewed by reflected light from the print so tends to be less bright and vibrant. The larger RGB colour spaces afford the image creator more image-editing headroom to work within... finer gradations of colour and less destructive edits, when making tonal adjustments. Given that the CMYK colour space is the smallest colour gamut available, it could be argued that there is no point working in any other colour space than sRGB, which is a substantially bigger colour gamut than CMYK.

image 1.
aRGB colour gamut

image 2.
sRGB colour gamut fits comfortably inside the aRGB colour gamut

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

image 3.
iMac 24in display calibrated to D65

image 4.
iMac 24in display calibrated to D65 showing the CMYK colour gamut well inside the boundaries

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

final images.

5. sRGB colour gamut

6. CMYK colour gamut inside the boundaries of the sRGB colour space

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

HOSTED PHOTO
please log in to view hosted photos in full size.

Dr Lazarus wrote in post #10752099
Yeah not sure what that's about because I just checked some jpegs right out of DPP and they said 24bit and they print fine. Yes that quote was from MPIX, which is a popular US-based lab.

First, 24 bit is also called 8 bit and vice versa. Three color channels, each one 8 bits = 24 bits.

Second, the OP didn't make it clear whether he was talking about home or lab printing, but he should have said, "1) A lot of people use aRGB when they plan to print their pictures [on a good quality home inkjet] rather than put them on the web because it has a wider gamut than sRGB. (Thus "better" colors in their prints.)" Large commercial labs want only sRGB because the bulk of their work comes from simple cameras that produce only images in sRGB space. They run the files on a mass production line that assumes sRGB. Higher priced "professional" labs have a color managed workflow that adjusts images according to their embedded space profile. And good inkjets have a wider gamut than the commercial machines, some them can even exceed Adobe RGB.

The monitor and the print come close because a.) the vast majority of colors in the vast majority of images are within sRGB and the monitor gamut, b.) we work not only by the visual display, but by the histogram as well and c.) we have learned to predict how those saturated colors that are clipped on the monitor will print out.

tzalman wrote in post #10752417
The monitor and the print come close because a.) the vast majority of colors in the vast majority of images are within sRGB and the monitor gamut, b.) we work not only by the visual display, but by the histogram as well and c.) we have learned to predict how those saturated colors that are clipped on the monitor will print out.

Yes! Elie said the "P word". This is what it's all about... PREDICTING how the print output will look, NOT perfectly reproducing on paper what your monitor display looks like. That would defy the laws of physics.

tzalman wrote in post #10752417
And good inkjets have a wider gamut than the commercial machines, some them can even exceed Adobe RGB.

And when you say, "good inkjets," would that include my new Pro9000 MkII? (Actually, I don't care if it would or not, I was just looking for an excuse to say, "I GOT A NEW PRO9000 MKII!!!!":p)

So it's about having experience with your tools and materials as well as profiling. Makes sense.

Thanks everybody.

You need a pro lab or good lab that supports aRgb if you want to print in that color space. You won't get "better" color, you'll get a wider gamut, if their printer supports it. I use aRgb as my lab requests it, but sRgb is fine too unless you have really vivid colors in the image.

ncjohn wrote in post #10753402
And when you say, "good inkjets," would that include my new Pro9000 MkII? (...

Why yes, I belive it does.

I'm using an IPF5000, and my whole workflow is aRGB start to print,. in 16 bit per channel, and this printer can do that. Works great

tim wrote in post #10753844
You need a pro lab or good lab that supports aRgb if you want to print in that color space. You won't get "better" color, you'll get a wider gamut, if their printer supports it. I use aRgb as my lab requests it, but sRgb is fine too unless you have really vivid colors in the image.

Just try to FIND a lab that accepts aRGB files and does NOT convert the file to sRGB before printing it!!!

Tim, does you lab convert, or is it one of the few who accepts and directly prints aRGB files? I have been trying for years to find a single lab for photographic prints that directly uses aRGB files without conversion.

I know that some home printers can now take aRGB input.

I use Queensberry as my print lab, i'm pretty sure they do things properly, given the massive volume they print. Well probably not massive compared with the US, but they have a few machines and they print in two shifts when it gets busy.

One day i'll take an image with very vivid colors and send sRgb and Adobe RGB versions, and see if they come back any different.