>I use sRGB. Most web browsers won't show Adobe RGB jpegs >correctly. And I post my owrk online constantly. > >Those of you who use Adobe RGB, you use this just for printing >purposes and then make sRGB versions seperately to post >online, or what?
I have been using sRGB for the same reason, but I have been reconsidering the issue. I'd like to hear how others respond to this.
>There is a very informative essay on sRGB, Adobe RGB and Pro >Photo RGB on the Luminous Landscape site: > >http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml > > >Personally, I take their analysis (info provided by Jeff >Schewe and Bruce Fraser) much more seriously than Ken >Rockwell's (no offense intended to Ken or his fans, just my >opinion). > >In the "From Camera to Print" video tutorial, Jeff >Schewe and Michael Reichmann also review the subject. > >I hope this helps, >Phil >
You realize that the article linked from luminous landscape confirms what Rockwell is saying, right?
From the linked article:
"But, on the other hand, an image file in a wide space such as ProPhoto RGB needs to be kept in a cage, so that it doesn't accidentally get into the outside world. Anyone receiving a copy of such a file who doesn't know what they have, and who doesn't function in a properly colour managed workflow, or who presumes that the file is sRGB, can inadvertently use it to produce some really horrid results."
I think there are enough threads in the various forums out there on the value, or lack there of, of Ken's analysis and conclusions and don't think the world needs another one, especially as it is OT in this thread.
Regarding your selected paragraph, it may very well agree with the conclusions that Ken came up with. I have not read Ken's article on the issue. I simply offered the LL link and stated (for what it's worth, which probably isn't very much) that I trust Michael's and Jeff's info more than Ken's. This doesn't say anything about Ken...just about me I guess. By all means, everyone should form their own opinions.
No one is right all the time so I am not taking sides nor will I post further on Ken Rockwell. I have looked at his site enough to know that, for me, I'd rather get my "expert" info from others but that certainly doesn't mean I'm right and someone else is wrong. Just doing what works for me.
It may not have been the best link to post to on my part, as they're talking more about one's work space than actually which to shoot in.
What I inferred from the LL article (and their video, not sure if you've seen it) was that Pro Photo RGB was the preferred color space to work in and as camera's don't operate there yet, Adobe RGB is the next best thing to shoot in (works better, for what I do) than sRGB.
I actually thought Don's post below was, for me, the best and easiest to understand answer here yet and broke it down very well!
That's true. My first consideration is the fine art print that I sell at shows. For that, and matching my workflow colorspace from camera to software to print, I shoot in Adobe RGB. If I'm going convert an image to a jpeg for posting online, I will convert it to sRGB.
It doesn't matter what it is set to if you are shooting RAW. Raw files have no colorspace until they are converted. I set my camera to ARGB anyway, and always convert to Pro Photo to future proof the edited file the best I can. After editing I simply make COPIES in the colorspace that matches my intended use for that copy - sRGB for the web, ARGB for matte, CMYK for pre press, and leave it in Profoto for hi end photo papers with a gamut greater than ARGB, provided the printer can print up to at least an ARGB Gamut. I use an Epson 7880 for photo paper and it's gamut range is extremely close to Profoto. My 4800's gamut range is approximately ARGB and I use it for matte paper exclusively.
The only time I could think that using SrGB while shooting is if you are shooting jpegs for unedited uploads, or RAW+Jpg and like before you plan to use the jpegs on the web unedited.
Wed 13-Aug-08 09:52 AM | edited Wed 13-Aug-08 09:54 AM by Arkayem
>What setting is everyone using on their D700 - sRGB or Adobe >RGB?
Well, if you shoot in raw, you select the color space you want later.
In our studio we have found that sRGB gives smoother transitions resulting in more natural looking skin colors.
The science behind this is that there are only a finite number of digital steps for the colors regardless of which gamut you choose. For 8 bit color there are only 256 color steps per channel and for 16 bit color there are 65536 (much better). In either case, this means that a wider gamut spreads the colors farther appart, which means bigger steps between the discrete colors. Since sRGB covers all skin colors, it is the best choice for portraiture.
Foe landscapes, I think aRGB is a better choice, because there are lots of colors in nature that are outside the sRGB gamut.
From my perspective, this discussion is akin to the "RAW vs Jpeg" discussion. There are a great many variables that will determine your use of image capture format and of color space in post processing. Some of these include:
Private vs organizational use, and if organizational: The sponsoring organization's criteria and standards, etc. The primary end use of the image The anticipated additional use of the image The archiving parameters including storage media, time frame, etc. The volume of images captured The capture time frame involved The capture storage available The on-location post processing requirements The on-location post processing equipment available The image use time priorities The image use transmission requirements The image use media parameters Etc., etc.
For example, compare an Olympics SI shooter, vs. a National Geographic mountain climber documenting a K2 climb, vs a backpacking safari trekker crossing the Serengeti, vs a parent shooting their 4th graders soccer match for grandparent's to enjoy. Each one has a vastly different amount and quality of available technology and resources at hand, let alone difference in end use. You need to define, very specifically, what your parameters are before you can begin to determine the answer. And even then, particularly for private use, it's often just a matter of preference, with any number of different choices yielding essentially the equivelant end results.
OldPhotos "If everyone possesses some measure of this intangible quality called creativity, photography is unprecedented as an outlet for its expression." - Ansel Adams
This will not affect RAW images, only the JPEG and TIFF if you set any of these options.
If you are into RAW, then you can process in either sRGB or AdobeRGB with your post processing software. The above recommendation is therefore right.
If you post images on the web, or email/upload images (JPEGs) to a general photo shop for your prints, then mostly you should send your JPEGs in sRGB space. Ask the print shop, not this forum for their advise. Then this makes the above recommendation correct for too. The consequences of posting AbobeRGB space JPEGs on the web (or to the high street print shop) are that your images will appear duller.
If you are a commercial photographer, or can professionally print your work, you will work in RAW and process in something other than sRGB space. So the above recommendation is right again.
The advanced photgrapher will always have a more complex workflow or suggestion. I have just tried to keep it simple and foolproof.