A few reactions to the quoted post -
- Its not much of a hassle to work in Adobe RGB. Just convert to SRGB
before saving for screen devices. I just use a Photoshop action that
resizes, converts the color space, flattens layers, drops the image from
16 bits to 8 bit and saves as a jpg. I've been using Adobe RGB for core
files since I first stated with Photoshop 5.
- When it comes to printing - I may be wrong on this but I don't think
that the Epson printer I use is either an sRGB or Adobe RGB device.
Basically there is a native color space for each type of paper and a
corresponding color profile. The color space isn't sRGB or Adobe RGB,
it's "Premium Glossy" or "Enhanced Matte" or whatever... The color
spaces for the different types of papers can be fairly constrained (in
the case of matte papers particularly) or broad. It makes sense to use a
wider gamut like Adobe RGB in source files for printing and let the
print process convert colors that are outside the destination gamut if
needed. Epson i s continually increasing the gamut of their inks and
papers, so it seems best to preserve as much color info in the source
file as possible, in case you want to print it in the future.
- Printing via services - for low end services (drug stores, big box
stores) converting to srgb makes sense. Its a safe harbor - sRGB is the
least common denominator so odds are any printer can handle it. If you
are paying any kind of premium or working with a lab that holds itself
out as having any kind of professional status, they should be using a
color managed process and should be able to work with the profile
embedded in your image.
From what I've been able to tell, monitors work within their native
color space, which may or may not correspond to sRGB or AdobeRGB or
whatever. So a monitor that is 78% of sRGB is just that - its native
color space coincides with 78% of the sRGB space. Some monitors can
emulate certain standard color spaces. I think this is what Igor was
referring to when he mentioned that some software assumes that the
monitor is sRGB and can produce off results when a wide gamut montior is
actually used. But the color space used by the monitor is not necessary
a standard space, hence the need to use the manufacture's profile, or
calibrate with a colorimeter.
Mark
On 4/28/2016 1:04 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I'm no expert on this stuff, but it seems to me that Adobe RGB is
specifically for printing and THEN only if the printer can handle it
and is ALSO calibrated to match your calibrated monitor.
In research I found this post, which seemed to make a lot of sense to me:
<begin quote>
Flat out - if you're mostly displaying your work on the web, use sRGB.
Read this article: https://fstoppers.com/pictures/adobergb-vs-srgb-3167
Your goal should be to work in the same color space that your target
audience will be seeing. For 99% of computer monitors, that means
SRGB. Doesn't matter if you personally have a wide-gamut monitor, most
people don't.
If you work in anything else, you are just creating extra hassle for
yourself because you won't know how the image will look to the rest of
the world. You'll have to just edit it again for the people stuck in
the sRGB color space.
You can create the photo with a non-sRGB color space and let the web
automatically convert/interpret the colors to sRGB. But if you let the
web do that conversion, it will not do a great job, some colors will
look off or desaturated... whereas your own conversion will be exactly
what you want.
If you shoot raw, there is no color space assigned (yet). If you then
import the raw into lightroom, lightroom is actually temporarily
working in their version of the ProPhoto RGB color space,
(http://digital-photography-school.com/everything-need-know-lightroom-colour-space/)
which has the biggest gamut of color. Then when you're done playing
with the various sliders and you like how it looks on the screen, you
can export to sRGB, AdobeRGB, or ProPhoto. Lightroom will convert the
colors to the chosen profile, not just assign the profile blindly, and
it will do a good job of it.
AdobeRGB is specifically for printing (since most devices with screens
cannot display it) and even then, many printers can't handle it either
and are working in sRGB. So unless you want to risk paying money for a
nice print and then it comes out with wacky colors, stick to sRGB.
You can of course work in AdobeRGB for your own personal wallpaper, or
make specialized versions of some images for other people with
wide-gamut monitors.
<end quote>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
