Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Apr 27, 2007, 10:48 PM   #11
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

rhermans wrote:
Quote:
Just coming back to finish this story.

It was a problem with the colorspaces,

but because I start of mostly from raw the problem was in RAW4.0,
here I exported the image in adobe RGB to photoshop.

Ps kept the colorspace, even when it was set as sRGB so when saving to jpg
the color's changed.
When saving using save for web, ps does a conversion between to the sRgb colorspace resulting in the difference above.

Now converting the image from adobe RGB to sRGB in Ps would be a solution but
to keep it easy I've set Raw and Ps both to work standard with sRGB and this works out good enough for me.
Most of the shot's I take are for the web some for a printing service but they have send me their printers colorprofile, and I always archive the raw files.

Ronny
Augh, I should have remembered that one! I had the same problem, but it was so long ago I don't even think about it anymore.

The fact that Photoshop defaults to Adobe RGB very likely leads many to believe that they should in fact be working in Adobe RGB, when the fact of the matter is 99% of us should never touch it. Adobe RGB is only properly supported by a few, select devices and it's only real use that I've seen is that images converted from Adobe RGB to CMYK come out better looking than if they were converted from sRGB. Unless you are sending image files to some place that requires CMYK files only (like many magazines), you shouldn't use Adobe RGB or CMYK for anything.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2007, 3:42 PM   #12
PDL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Posts: 172
Default

Corpsy wrote:
Quote:
rhermans wrote:
Quote:
Just coming back to finish this story.

It was a problem with the colorspaces,

but because I start of mostly from raw the problem was in RAW4.0,
here I exported the image in adobe RGB to photoshop.

Ps kept the colorspace, even when it was set as sRGB so when saving to jpg
the color's changed.
When saving using save for web, ps does a conversion between to the sRgb colorspace resulting in the difference above.

Now converting the image from adobe RGB to sRGB in Ps would be a solution but
to keep it easy I've set Raw and Ps both to work standard with sRGB and this works out good enough for me.
Most of the shot's I take are for the web some for a printing service but they have send me their printers colorprofile, and I always archive the raw files.

Ronny
Augh, I should have remembered that one! I had the same problem, but it was so long ago I don't even think about it anymore.

The fact that Photoshop defaults to Adobe RGB very likely leads many to believe that they should in fact be working in Adobe RGB, when the fact of the matter is 99% of us should never touch it. Adobe RGB is only properly supported by a few, select devices and it's only real use that I've seen is that images converted from Adobe RGB to CMYK come out better looking than if they were converted from sRGB. Unless you are sending image files to some place that requires CMYK files only (like many magazines), you shouldn't use Adobe RGB or CMYK for anything.


I humbly disagree here. I use AdobeRGB for everything - because I want to use the largest color space I can. If you need to use a smaller color space - then you can always go down. If you start in a small color space then you can not go up. Out on the ASMP site - they recommend using large color spaces (agreed they are mostly concerned with prints --- so am I) throughout the workflow. However, you need to be very careful in calibrating your equipment. However, if you like the way it looks then keep on doing what you like. My preferred output is print not computers.

http://www.asmp.org/index.php

Read the PDF (right hand side) - this is a quote from Quick Guide part 3

http://www.asmp.org/publications/updig/

"AdobeRGB is better for image editing, while shooting a narrow-gamut space such as sRGB is convenient if images do not require color correction or editing, or if the images are intended for Web or sRGB lab prints. One consideration: A wide-gamut space can always be converted to a narrow space such as sRGB, but a narrow-gamut space converted to a wide space will not recapture the extra gamut."

PDL


PDL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 28, 2007, 6:20 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

PDL wrote:
Quote:
I humbly disagree here. I use AdobeRGB for everything - because I want to use the largest color space I can. If you need to use a smaller color space - then you can always go down. If you start in a small color space then you can not go up. Out on the ASMP site - they recommend using large color spaces (agreed they are mostly concerned with prints --- so am I) throughout the workflow. However, you need to be very careful in calibrating your equipment. However, if you like the way it looks then keep on doing what you like. My preferred output is print not computers.

http://www.asmp.org/index.php

Read the PDF (right hand side) - this is a quote from Quick Guide part 3

http://www.asmp.org/publications/updig/


"AdobeRGB is better for image editing, while shooting a narrow-gamut space such as sRGB is convenient if images do not require color correction or editing, or if the images are intended for Web or sRGB lab prints. One consideration: A wide-gamut space can always be converted to a narrow space such as sRGB, but a narrow-gamut space converted to a wide space will not recapture the extra gamut."

PDL

One thing you need to realize is that sRGB and Adobe RGB are both 8 bit color formats. Neither contains more color information. The difference is that Adobe RGB covers a wider gamut, spreading the same amount of data over a wider area. Most of the additional color gamut that Adobe RGB encompasses are colors that no consumer monitor can even display, so unless you're using a monitor specifically built to display Adobe RGB, you cannot properly calibrate the monitor to work with the format. Therefore if you're creating images for the web or video, you gain nothing with Adobe RGB.

Secondly, the vast majority of consumer printers and consumer photo labs (that probably 98% of the people in this forum use) are designed to work with sRGB since that is by far the most common color space consumers use. Most digital photographs taken are taken as JPG, and nearly all cameras default to sRGB.

So, for the vast majority of shooters, shooting sRGB will produce images that off the bat look better on screen. How it prints will depend on a number of factors, but unless you're willing to invest several thousand in a monitor that can actually display those additional colors (so that you're not shooting in the dark when making adjustments) and will actually be making use of printers that can reproduce those colors, Adobe RGB really doesn't have anything to offer but more hassle.

Besides, if you're really concerned about preserving color information, shooting RAW will yield far more color information than any Adobe RGB JPG or TIF. Perhaps in a decade or two when consumer hardware catches up to the software, you can dig out those old RAW files, reconvert them and print your flowers at a slightly more vibrant shade of blue.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 1:18 AM   #14
PDL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Posts: 172
Default

I do shoot in RAW - and I understand that my output devices do not cover the wider gamut of AdobeRGB - just like our current breed of monitors and printers do not cover the entire color range of sRGB. I print my stuff out on my el-cr*po inkjet printer and it looks fine - I even like the way that AdobeRGB Reds and blue Greens look to my jaded eye rather than the contrasty and saturated colors of sRGB - again to my jaded eye.

When I print something large > 8x10 - I prefer uncropped so it is really 6.something x 10 - I use Costco and their color printer profiles. I printed out an image from my vacation taken with my *ist Ds at 20x30 - and it came out beautiful. It is now hanging on the wall of my wife's office. When preparing to print to those printers (which I am sure that they can see larger color ranges than sRGB or AdobeRGB - on photopaper no less) I use Lightroom with the printer profiles embedded. I also tell Costco to "skip" their in printer processing. The large image was printed by Snapfish - the Costco partner - in Maryland. Came out quite nice.

WhenI show my images to other people - they constantly remark on how my images look closer to life than others they have seen of the same subject. And I am talking about both P&S and DSLR's. When people other than myself like the images - gee I must be doing something right ---- after all it is about the image.

PDL
PDL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 3:07 AM   #15
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

PDL wrote:
Quote:
I do shoot in RAW - and I understand that my output devices do not cover the wider gamut of AdobeRGB - just like our current breed of monitors and printers do not cover the entire color range of sRGB. I print my stuff out on my el-cr*po inkjet printer and it looks fine - I even like the way that AdobeRGB Reds and blue Greens look to my jaded eye rather than the contrasty and saturated colors of sRGB - again to my jaded eye.

When I print something large > 8x10 - I prefer uncropped so it is really 6.something x 10 - I use Costco and their color printer profiles. I printed out an image from my vacation taken with my *ist Ds at 20x30 - and it came out beautiful. It is now hanging on the wall of my wife's office. When preparing to print to those printers (which I am sure that they can see larger color ranges than sRGB or AdobeRGB - on photopaper no less) I use Lightroom with the printer profiles embedded. I also tell Costco to "skip" their in printer processing. The large image was printed by Snapfish - the Costco partner - in Maryland. Came out quite nice.

WhenI show my images to other people - they constantly remark on how my images look closer to life than others they have seen of the same subject. And I am talking about both P&S and DSLR's. When people other than myself like the images - gee I must be doing something right ---- after all it is about the image.

PDL
Yes, your friends think your photos look good and therefore it must be the color space... It's very likely that Snapfish treats your image files the same way Smugmug does and converts them to sRGB before printing;

http://www.smugmug.com/help/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-1998

The thing that most people will find impressive looking in a printed photograph is realistic skin tones. Since the extra color gamut of Adobe RGB falls outside the range of human skin tones and more into the flourescent range, sRGB images actually produce smoother color gradations in that area.

You might prefer the colors you get on your home printer from Adobe RGB images, but it has nothing to do with the color gamut. Adobe RGB reserves the higher saturation levels for that extra gamut, and a device that reads that data without properly interpreting the color profile will interpret the colors as duller looking. On a device that properly supports Adobe RGB and can reproduce the additional colors, an Adobe RGB and an sRGB image would look identical except that the Adobe RGB image may have some spots of more vibrant color, which I guess you wouldn't like since you prefer duller colors.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 6:39 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
rhermans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Antwerp - Belgium
Posts: 3,454
Default

Just why I use sRgb instead of AdobeRgb

for me it's important that my pictures look the same, on monitor, on paper and on the web.

AdobeRGB can look perfect on web pages when you use a mac and a safari web browser. The only browser that uses the color profile that is embedded in the jpg.
But there are some people who see those images with other browsers. Some even use other operating systems. So this is working against using adobeRgb for me.

Sending to a printer might give better results, but that is something I normally don't do, got a inktjet at home, a color laserjet, and a hotwax at work but I don't like the results, so I send the shots to an on line service that gives better quality and who have send me the color profile of their printing service.

Ok adobeRgb has a larger area of colors but this doesn't help to get a consistent look. I do keep the originals so if needed I can still convert them to another color space although I don't think I'll have to do that, don't think I'll ever have the time to do this .

"Just hate myself not seeing that I was exporting the images in a different color space than the one I normally use. I just blame it on the slightly changed interface."
rhermans is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 7:43 AM   #17
Senior Member
 
ennacac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 4,198
Default

FWIW, I sent some 12"x18" images to Costco for printing that were saved in Adobe RGB on my Mac, checked the box for them not to change my color settings and they all printed exactly like I see them on my Apple Cinema Display.

If I let them change the color setting to what they are using for a profile, there is a blue color shift from what I see, which I don't like.

I don't really care what the color profile looks like on the web, but I do want my prints to look exactly they way I see them on my screen, which is why I use Adobe RGB.

My Intel Mac laptop and the Cinema Display both see the images the same and they print the same from both using Adobe RGB.

Tom
ennacac is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 2:19 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

ennacac wrote:
Quote:
FWIW, I sent some 12"x18" images to Costco for printing that were saved in Adobe RGB on my Mac, checked the box for them not to change my color settings and they all printed exactly like I see them on my Apple Cinema Display.

If I let them change the color setting to what they are using for a profile, there is a blue color shift from what I see, which I don't like.

I don't really care what the color profile looks like on the web, but I do want my prints to look exactly they way I see them on my screen, which is why I use Adobe RGB.

My Intel Mac laptop and the Cinema Display both see the images the same and they print the same from both using Adobe RGB.

Tom
Do you have any reason to believe that your displays are capable of displaying the wider gamut of Adobe RGB? I haven't found any information online to suggest so. And why would you assume that a "color settings" checkbox at Costco somehow implies that they are using more expensive machines that support a wider color gamut than any other consumer print house? It's Costco. Checking that box most likely means the goofballs behind the counter won't try to fix your photos for you.

And the fact that your photos come out the same printed as they appear on screen would not be unexpected. You're viewing them with the appropriate color profile that translates the colors to their nearest sRGB equivalent, and the printers at Costco are doing the same, so you are seeing the same sRGB translation.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 3:40 PM   #19
PDL
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Posts: 172
Default

Well I choose to follow what the customer wants. I also am not satisfied to follow the standard assumption that most people don't use anything but 256 color settings on their PC's - I am using 32bit color off my card how about you?

Anyway challenge your assumptions - take a look at this:

http://www.pantone.com/pages/Pantone...19455&ca=2

Costco are Fuji laserprinters using Fuji Paper (at least at the Costco I use) - and they use printer profiles available from http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/usi...r_profiles.htm

And why would the guy behind the counter - not follow the instructions?

Try pushing the boundaries a little. Oh and I still have my Besler 23C enlarger with a Dicro 23dgo color head (El Nikor 65mm lens) that I used to print Cibachrome prints on. I understand that when you "check" the color on your print you have to use the same type of light source where the image will be viewed. I know that for each package of paper you have to change the dicroic filters as a starting point - same with the light bulb and when you mix a new batch of soup. Unfortunately - I can not use it now - not a good idea to be doing color print processing on a septic tank system (heavy metals and all that). And my printer is CYMK not RGB.

PDL

PDL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 29, 2007, 6:13 PM   #20
Senior Member
 
Corpsy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 879
Default

PDL wrote:
Quote:
Well I choose to follow what the customer wants. I also am not satisfied to follow the standard assumption that most people don't use anything but 256 color settings on their PC's - I am using 32bit color off my card how about you?

Anyway challenge your assumptions - take a look at this:

http://www.pantone.com/pages/Pantone...19455&ca=2
There is no such standard assumption as the one you've mentioned. You're talking about and linking to information on the old legacy standard of web safe colors. This hearkens back to the days of VGA displays only capable of displaying 256 colors. There probably hasn't been a new one available in about 15 years. Web safe colors were just a standard set of colors that when used, could be reliably displayed accurately on any monitor.

An 8 bit image is called 8 bit in reference to the fact that it stores 8 bits of information per color channel per pixel. An 8 bit GIF file has one color channel (or "palette"), and thus 256 individual colors. Most modern formats, such as JPG, TIF, PNG, etc..., have three 8 bit channels capable of 256 shades of red, 256 shades of green, and 256 shades of blue. Combined that makes for over 16.7 million colors. Any modern display can reproduce nearly the entire range of these colors.

Sometimes these images are also called 24 bit in reference to the 3 combined channels. A 32 bit image is one that contains an extra 8 bit alpha channel. How these display is dependant on the software used.

Quote:
Costco are Fuji laserprinters using Fuji Paper (at least at the Costco I use) - and they use printer profiles available from http://www.drycreekphoto.com/icc/usi...r_profiles.htm

And why would the guy behind the counter - not follow the instructions?

Try pushing the boundaries a little. Oh and I still have my Besler 23C enlarger with a Dicro 23dgo color head (El Nikor 65mm lens) that I used to print Cibachrome prints on. I understand that when you "check" the color on your print you have to use the same type of light source where the image will be viewed. I know that for each package of paper you have to change the dicroic filters as a starting point - same with the light bulb and when you mix a new batch of soup. Unfortunately - I can not use it now - not a good idea to be doing color print processing on a septic tank system (heavy metals and all that). And my printer is CYMK not RGB.

PDL
As for the rest of your post, I don't see why it matters that Costco uses Fuji printers and paper. Where they get the color profiles from doesn't matter, it has nothing to do with Adobe RGB except where it pertains to translating the gamut to something it can render.

I never said the guys at Costco wouldn't follow instructions, I suggested that the checkbox that was mentioned was likely instructions for them not to adjust your colors as they saw fit. Obviously if the checkbox is for not changing color settings, then not checking it would imply that they will change color settings.

As far as your home printer, pretty much every color printer uses CMYK ink, but they are tuned to receive sRGB data. Even some of the most expensive commercial printers will produce better looking and more accurate colors using sRGB than CMYK. In my experience producing ads for magazines, posters and billboards, CMYK was only used by the highest end printing presses and required SWAP proofs to match the colors.

CMYK information, or Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black, gives the printer specific instructions on how to mix those ink colors. Since different printers use somewhat different variations of these colors and mix them differently, results will vary significantly from printer to printer, whereas when an sRGB image is used, the printer has it's own profile that knows how to appropriately convert the sRGB data into CMYK values that will be accurate on that particularly machine. The printing houses we used most often had to come up with their own specific color mixes to get as accurate a shade of blue as possible to match our corporate logo due to the non-standard nature of CMYK color.
Corpsy is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:16 PM.