Adobe RGB or sRGB and why? - DPChallenge Forums

Canon EF 24-70mm f/2.8L USM

05/06/2004 08:31:02 AM · #1

what are the advatages or disadvatages?

doctornick

Apple iPhone 13 Pro

05/06/2004 11:28:34 AM · #2

bump

RHoldenSr

Canon EOS-5D

Canon EF 70-200mm f/4.0L USM

05/06/2004 11:55:21 AM · #3

If I may offer my limited explanation:

SRGB is for computer and web display
It has the smaller color spectrum of most used.

RGB (generally Adobe RGB) and has a wider color spectrum.
There are numerouus RGB profiles but Adobe is the most popular.

ProPhoto RGB has a wider color spectrum than RGB
(This is the new profile coming in a lot of new digital cameras)

For printing it is all up to the lab you are using and what profile they are using. You need to match so that what you print is what you see.

Some labs use SRGB some use Adobe RGB and others have their own profiles that are tweaked to the equipment they are using and how they have calibated them. For example; DPCprints uses EZPrints.ICC.

Message edited by author 2004-05-06 11:56:36.

05/06/2004 12:16:14 PM · #4

So I should make sure that the file form is the same as the lab for best results.

Now, knowing that Adobe RGB has a broader spectrum, would be better
to shoot in adobe RGB then switch, if necessary, to sRGB in photoshop.

corrected typo

Message edited by author 2004-05-06 12:17:34.

dwoolridge

05/06/2004 12:25:48 PM · #5

sRGB: low-bit editing space or the lowest common denominator
Adobe RGB: the clydesdale of intermediate/working spaces, especially for high-bit editing
ProPhoto RGB: a very wide space created by Kodak I believe some years ago which is great for preserving input device data. Many swear by it (like Bruce Fraser I think) as a working space.

If your input file is a JPEG (8 bits per channel), stick with sRGB unless you have a good handle on these things, in which case you might want to try another space, like hmmm, BruceRGB I think.

If your input file is a 16-bit TIFF/PSD or similar beast, Adobe RGB is a good working space to start. However, once you step outside using sRGB you open up the can of color management worms. You will have to concern yourself with sRGB conversions when creating files for the web (or similar environment). You might also start to worry about soft-proofing your images for one or more printers.

Here are some sample workflows to give you an idea about the levels of complexity that can be involved depending on how serious you want to take this stuff.

Workflow 1: Easy peasy
1. Set camera to JPEG and sRGB
2. Edit in your favourite editor as is (i.e. maintaining sRGB)
3. Optionally, soft-proof/convert for target output device(s) (like a printer)

Workflow 2: Exposure master and entry level geek
1. Set camera to JPEG and Adobe RGB
2. Assign your camera profile in PhotoShop
3. Convert to sRGB
4. Edit to your heart's content (i.e. in sRGB)
5. Optionally, soft-proof/convert for target output device(s) (like a printer)

Workflow 3: Geek worrier
1. Set camera to RAW + JPEG
1a. Optionally, stick with your JPEG and follow Workflow 1 or 2.
2. RAW convert to 16-bit and Adobe RGB (*1)
3. Edit in this wide-gamut working space
3a. Probably save your intermediate work
4. Soft-proof and/or convert to target output device(s) (e.g. use sRGB for web display)

Workflow 4: Ã�bergeek
1. Set camera to RAW + JPEG
1a Your JPEG is for previewing only
2. RAW convert to 16-bit and ProPhoto RGB (*2)
2a. convert to camera device instead
3. Assign your camera profile in PS (or equivalent) (unless you did 2a above)
4. Convert to Adobe RGB (*1)
5. Edit in this wide-gamut working space
5a. Probably save your intermediate work
6. Soft-proof and/or convert to target output device(s) (e.g. use sRGB for web display)

*1 There are other high-bit working spaces that you can use, such as the very wide ProPhoto (which some might consider too wide). I prefer BetaRGB myself.
*2 We use ProPhoto in this step to preserve as much of the device color data as possible. You could also use a much wider space, but it's probably not necessary. As noted in *1, you could probably edit directly in ProPhoto.

Canon EF 55-200mm f/4.5-5.6 II USM

05/06/2004 01:23:23 PM · #6

1 ok, If I shoot in RAW do the parameter settings in camera have any effect on the image?

2 so is it pretty much a waste to convert a RAW to an 8 bit TIFF?

and 3 (starting to feel like a digital retard again!:D)
what is soft proof

edit typo

Message edited by author 2004-05-06 13:24:03.

dwoolridge

05/06/2004 02:31:41 PM · #7

Originally posted by superdave_909:

1 ok, If I shoot in RAW do the parameter settings in camera have any effect on the image?

As far as I know, the embedded JPEG (assuming there is one) will be affected by parameter changes. By extension, they also modify the thumbnail/LCD preview, including the histogram.

Originally posted by superdave_909:

2 so is it pretty much a waste to convert a RAW to an 8 bit TIFF?

Not necessarily. You might not have an editor that provides adequate support for 16-bit files. You might like to keep your editing to 8-bit in sRGB. You might not like the idea of a lossy image format for your 8-bit editing.

Originally posted by superdave_909:

and 3 what is soft proof

Essentially it's a way for you to get an idea how your image will look according to the target printer (or some other output device). It's here you'll make device-specific edits to take into account gamut problems (clipping and such) or other strange device characteristics (that can be described by a profile).

orussell

Canon EOS Rebel T6s

05/06/2004 03:03:37 PM · #8

Originally posted by dwoolridge:

Originally posted by superdave_909:
1 ok, If I shoot in RAW do the parameter settings in camera have any effect on the image?

As far as I know, the embedded JPEG (assuming there is one) will be affected by parameter changes. By extension, they also modify the thumbnail/LCD preview, including the histogram.

Originally posted by superdave_909:
2 so is it pretty much a waste to convert a RAW to an 8 bit TIFF?

Not necessarily. You might not have an editor that provides adequate support for 16-bit files. You might like to keep your editing to 8-bit in sRGB. You might not like the idea of a lossy image format for your 8-bit editing.

Originally posted by superdave_909:
and 3 what is soft proof

Essentially it's a way for you to get an idea how your image will look according to the target printer (or some other output device). It's here you'll make device-specific edits to take into account gamut problems (clipping and such) or other strange device characteristics (that can be described by a profile).

In PS 6.0, I can open 16 bit tiffs but it won't allow me to make duplicate layers for editting. Does PS 6.0 not support 16 bit? Does Elements 2.0?

05/06/2004 03:07:20 PM · #9

Thank you! I appreciate you taking the time to answer my questions!
And I'm sure that I will be asking to pick your brain latter too.:D

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

05/06/2004 03:09:07 PM · #10

Originally posted by orussell:

In PS 6.0, I can open 16 bit tiffs but it won't allow me to make duplicate layers for editting. Does PS 6.0 not support 16 bit? Does Elements 2.0?

I've been using 6 and have not had problems with 16 bit, although I have
not tried creating duplicate layers in 16bit. But I do know that
elements does not support 16 bit.

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

05/06/2004 03:10:54 PM · #11

In photoshop 6 you can't use layers with 16 bit tiffs.

dwoolridge

05/06/2004 03:11:30 PM · #12

Originally posted by orussell:

In PS 6.0, I can open 16 bit tiffs but it won't allow me to make duplicate layers for editting. Does PS 6.0 not support 16 bit? Does Elements 2.0?

PS 6.0 does have limited support for 16-bit editing. There are web sites that can give you a little help and books are always good resources. Scott Kelby has some useful tricks for working with 16-bit files. I've never used PS 6.0 myself, so I'm not really a good source of information for it. I have no idea what Elements 2.0 can do, but I imagine it's less functional that a full version of PS 6.0.

Considering how useful PS CS is with respect to 16-bit editing, upgrading is practically necessary if you're serious about making that jump. On the other hand, Picture Window Pro has been touted as a great alternative to PS and it supports 16-bit editing (and had better support for it before PS I believe). It actually has a reasonable price tag.

Canon EF 70-300mm f/4.5-5.6 DO IS USM

05/06/2004 03:11:53 PM · #13

Originally posted by cpanaioti:

In photoshop 6 you can't use layers with 16 bit tiffs.

does 7

cpanaioti

Canon EOS-40D

05/06/2004 03:13:03 PM · #14

I don't know about 7. I've only used 6 and CS.