So why don't we just dial in sRGB

[3dogs]

Strange this !

A lot of recommendations using ProPhoto RGB and then the answer is "I think the answer is use whatever pleases you." The thread is not about the recent update of Lightroom that I don't use but about what color space to use. Does anyone have own experiences of what I asked about?

Per

Having initiated the thread in the first place I guess it would be better if I explained....
This is a web based forum ( I know that is hard to believe...but there you go...I will say it again it is WEB based) and sRGB rules here, we post and comment on images made in other colour spaces.......in all seriousness....we post scans of colourgraphs, omnidimensional colour cages, debate and post serious depictions of colour..........am I the only one that sees how bloody rediculous and funny that is?
I was tempted to post a sample of the same image made in a variety of colour spaces .....I was even going to suggest that they were scans....but I fell at the last moment, not even I could be so cruel.

So @Emulator got his update, we found out that there is more than one sRGB and more,
so what started out as a rhetorical turned out to be exactly what this site is about....PRINTERKNOWLDGE...I am in hopes that someone is exploring your question, I know I am thinking on it but did not get time to dig deeper yet....please dont think you point is being ignored

Andrew

 

[Emulator]

@nrdlnd The Lightroom upgrade comment relates to post#51 to #60, long before you asked your question. It pays to read a whole thread if you cannot understand an individual post.

The "I think the answer is use whatever pleases you." was a general observation and relates to a range of posts, Roy's post #65 and earlier posts, not your question. This also means that I am getting lazy in not putting in the detailed post references, but that gets tedious.

This is what @3dogs means by a "WEB based forum", at least I think it does.

 

[nrdlnd]

Ink Stained Fingers wrote: "I did the same what Elle Stone did..."

Yes this was a lot of interesting links! It's a lot about calibrating monitors. I've got one of the later more wide gamut monitors the Dell U3014 that can almost cover 100% of Adobe RGB (I think 98%). In the menu I have the possibilities S-RGB and Adobe-RGB. If I want to calibrate the monitor I have three different options; S-RGB, Adobe-RGB and "native". The last one I suppose is the maximum gamut the monitor can deliver. For calibrating the monitor I use the software that comes with the monitor as it can calibrate the monitor in hardware together with the colorimeter i1 Pro. I don't think Argyll CMS can do hardware calibration.

So going through the whole chain; I start with my cameras RAW format (and maybe also the camera is profiled). Then I have the monitor and I think it should be profiled to the biggest colorspace it can deliver. My RAW-converter works in a big colorspace such as ProPhoto-RGB. Before printing I "softproof". Then does it matter if the monitor is profiled to S-RGB, Adobe- RGB or in my case Native-RGB? Doesn't it show what the printer can render even if the monitor is calibrated to a bigger colorspace? In some cases the monitor can't show the whole gamut the printer/paper combination can show as with for example som baryta papers and In some cases with matte papers and canvas the monitor can show a wider gamut. Does this matter?

Per

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Ink Stained Fingers wrote: "I did the same what Elle Stone did..."

Yes this was a lot of interesting links! It's a lot about calibrating monitors. I've got one of the later more wide gamut monitors the Dell U3014 that can almost cover 100% of Adobe RGB (I think 98%). In the menu I have the possibilities S-RGB and Adobe-RGB. If I want to calibrate the monitor I have three different options; S-RGB, Adobe-RGB and "native". The last one I suppose is the maximum gamut the monitor can deliver. For calibrating the monitor I use the software that comes with the monitor as it can calibrate the monitor in hardware together with the colorimeter i1 Pro. I don't think Argyll CMS can do hardware calibration.

So going through the whole chain; I start with my cameras RAW format (and maybe also the camera is profiled). Then I have the monitor and I think it should be profiled to the biggest colorspace it can deliver. My RAW-converter works in a big colorspace such as ProPhoto-RGB. Before printing I "softproof". Then does it matter if the monitor is profiled to S-RGB, Adobe- RGB or in my case Native-RGB? Doesn't it show what the printer can render even if the monitor is calibrated to a bigger colorspace? In some cases the monitor can't show the whole gamut the printer/paper combination can show as with for example som baryta papers and In some cases with matte papers and canvas the monitor can show a wider gamut. Does this matter?

Per

The benefits of wide gamut working spaces on printed output:

I kinda vowed to stay out of the colour management debates as it is impossible to discuss accurately and meaningfully in short 6 line messages.

Here is a high res video which covers why a wide gamut RGB working space like ProPhoto RGB can produce superior quality output to print.

Rendering intents are a vital part of the process.

WARNING - It is not entry level, and this is not a subject that is easy to demonstrate - Hope this is beneficial

High Resolution Video: http://digitaldog.net/files/WideGamutPrintVideo.mov

rs

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

The proofing function will show you how the printout will look like (almost), will show the areas out of gamut, and this accurately as long as your monitor has a gamut bigger than the printer gamut. If the monitor gamut is smaller than the printer gamut, it won't have an effect on your printout but you are less able to see what you will get , you won't see differences between highly saturated colors which are out of monitor gamut.

some more reading about monitors, out of gamut etc, quite well explained, can be found here

http://www.damiensymonds.com.au/art_smlgmt2.html

 

[3dogs]

Ink Stained Fingers wrote: "I did the same what Elle Stone did..."

Yes this was a lot of interesting links! It's a lot about calibrating monitors. I've got one of the later more wide gamut monitors the Dell U3014 that can almost cover 100% of Adobe RGB (I think 98%). In the menu I have the possibilities S-RGB and Adobe-RGB. If I want to calibrate the monitor I have three different options; S-RGB, Adobe-RGB and "native". The last one I suppose is the maximum gamut the monitor can deliver. For calibrating the monitor I use the software that comes with the monitor as it can calibrate the monitor in hardware together with the colorimeter i1 Pro. I don't think Argyll CMS can do hardware calibration.

So going through the whole chain; I start with my cameras RAW format (and maybe also the camera is profiled). Then I have the monitor and I think it should be profiled to the biggest colorspace it can deliver. My RAW-converter works in a big colorspace such as ProPhoto-RGB. Before printing I "softproof". Then does it matter if the monitor is profiled to S-RGB, Adobe- RGB or in my case Native-RGB? Doesn't it show what the printer can render even if the monitor is calibrated to a bigger colorspace? In some cases the monitor can't show the whole gamut the printer/paper combination can show as with for example som baryta papers and In some cases with matte papers and canvas the monitor can show a wider gamut. Does this matter?

Per

I am using Eizo Colour Navigator its their own software and I am yet to be convinced that it is better than a ColorMunki, and very confident that it is not going to perform better than the Pro version. Assuming, makes an ass of you and me.......check and make sure.

I figure you are working towards getting the best possible output you can with what you have available.

Another reason I started this thread was that in a related quest I put a lot of effort into developing a specification for a super computer for Photography whilst staying within my budget. What I encountered again and again was that as a buyer I had to be VERY aware that the machine I was planning to build was only going to be as fast as the slowest component. MANY of the things we focus on as users are capable of blistering speeds, but parts of the engine room are still in the stone age, and will remain there for some time, or make the outfit so expensive that it is just not reasonable for a pleasure photographer to outlay.

To me EXACTLY the same applies to Photography.....hence my STATEMENT, not a question.....

I defy anyone here, or anywhere for that matter to push ProPhoto through a sRGB colourspace, and the internet will only handle sRGB so posting anything that was built in the largest space possible, processed there is going to hit some hurdles:

First the monitor, then the printer and then the paper.......If one then wants to share as an image rather than as a file, and sharing is 90% internet based you just wasted all that RAW Pro Photo and sundry twin overhead sump motor processors........its all BS.

You can scan the biggest colour space that the human eye is capable of seeing and the moment you convert that to sRGB to transmit it as an image ......thats all you can get !!!

 

[RogerB]

I defy anyone here, or anywhere for that matter to push ProPhoto through a sRGB colourspace, and the internet will only handle sRGB so posting anything that was built in the largest space possible, processed there is going to hit some hurdles:

I think there's a bit of confusion here about how images are transmitted via the internet. The default colour space is sRGB but there is no limitation whatsoever on the colour space that you can use. An image consists of an array of pixels each of which has RGB values associated with it.The actual colour is defined by RGB values and the colour space which can be embedded in the image file in the form of a profile. Opening the image in a properly colour managed browser or other application will convert the RGB values to real colours using the embedded profile. You don't have to convert to sRGB to send an image.

I run the PDI competitions for my camera club and members submit images are submitted by email. For every competition I can guarantee that at least half a dozen will be in AdobeRGB or ProPhotoRGB colour space. Since they are tagged I can simply open them in Photoshop and convert them to sRGB to comply with competition rules. Of course, when I open them in Photoshop I get the full colour gamut of the relevant colour space.

Just for interest how does this image look to you? Hint - it's not sRGB.

 

[nrdlnd]

For someone new to printing nothing is obvious.

I figure you are working towards getting the best possible output you can with what you have available.

Yes of course! I also have an analogy. I have had as an interest to listen to music and I have built my own amplifiers and loudspeakers. One thing that was important was to have a great bandwidth especially when things became digital. The original CD specifikation was limiting even if it was supposed to cover a bandwith much greater than the human hearing. Nowdays my hearing is so impaired so I can't hear the differencies anymore - this is a real weak link!

Here is a high res video which covers why a wide gamut RGB working space like ProPhoto RGB can produce superior quality output to print.
Rendering intents are a vital part of the process. WARNING - It is not entry level, and this is not a subject that is easy to demonstrate - Hope this is beneficial

Thank you for that video! It's an excellent video very easy to understand and very instructive! I can see that it's a good thing to work in a bigger color space if you want to make as good prints as possible with the equipment you have. For internet use you have to convert to a lesser color space before publishing but I guess that even in this case it's advantegous to have processed the image in a bigger colorspace such as ProPhoto-RGB?

Per

 

[3dogs]

May be of interest.....

http://cameratico.com/guides/web-browser-color-management-guide/

So what exactly is one getting transmitted?

Sounds like Camera Clubs the world over are populated in the main by Juvanile Trogs, and perpetuated by the real thing.......next thing you know Camera Clubs will allow members to travel to and from meetings without a man with a red flag walking in front of their cars.......

Just for old time sake I tried to get a .dng file onto here and it will not go.....

 

[Emulator]

"When this new monitor arrived, suddenly all web pages looked like landscapes from Mars, with fluorescent colors, and every skin tone looked like it had just arrived from a vacation on the Caribbean without any sunscreen. It was that bad."

I knew it wasn't a good idea to buy that wide gamut monitor, I'm saving my money!

Although that Dell looks interesting.

Interesting ICC v4 not supported by my sRGB monitor, or is it Firefox, good job we switched to v2 on ColorMunki all those years ago!!

Perhaps I should try the "Enable it on the Firefox advanced configuration".