So why don't we just dial in sRGB

[Emulator]

Yes that looks a bit different! Are you using OEM inks, I am not. If you look at the gamut it does exceed sRGB in places.
ProPhoto looks a so much larger colour space, I wonder which printer could make full use of it.

 

[RogerB]

Yes that looks a bit different! Are you using OEM inks, I am not. If you look at the gamut it does exceed sRGB in places.
ProPhoto looks a so much larger colour space, I wonder which printer could make full use of it.

I don't think OEM inks are necessary to exceed sRGB. Third-party inks on CD's are about as far removed from an OEM system as you can get, but they can still exceed sRGB by a big margin. It's all about making the most of what you have. No device gamut comes even close to the gamut of ProPhotoRGB, but ProPhotoRGB is just a container - it makes use of every bit of your printer gamut volume. Print the test image using the two conditions. If you can't see any difference, or the difference is not big enough, then use a full sRGB workflow. Full sRGB will almost certainly give you "OK" results.

 

[3dogs]

I don't think OEM inks are necessary to exceed sRGB. Third-party inks on CD's are about as far removed from an OEM system as you can get, but they can still exceed sRGB by a big margin. It's all about making the most of what you have. No device gamut comes even close to the gamut of ProPhotoRGB, but ProPhotoRGB is just a container - it makes use of every bit of your printer gamut volume. Print the test image using the two conditions. If you can't see any difference, or the difference is not big enough, thejn use a full sRGB workflow. Full sRGB will almost certainly give you "OK" results.

So in numeric terms pro photoRGB is bigger than my 3880 can print. Let us now step into the relm of our actual visual capacity this then beggars the question:
Using numeric tools to measure are we able to say that the 3880 appears to be able to print colour greater than the accepted limits of human vision, or is it less? Because daft or not this man appears to have some credibility if he is writing truly of his achievements.
If my visual "container" is smaller than sRGB then he is not daft he is right. How and on what he actually goes over onto cloud cuckoo land on other topics is not at issue here.
On the other hand if our visual cage falls outside sRGB, even to the smallest extent, then I would be inclined to use the larger space.......even if my printing only encountered those colours falling outside very rarely.

 

[Emulator]

On which medium and by which presentation method, from which source, can we attempt to test our individual capabilities?

I think X-rite have some guidance on their website, but no solution to those questions.

Has anyone a ProPhoto colour space file apart from the Evaluation test .tif?

I am sure that file cannot be "fully seen" by most of us with our current equipment. I have my doubts that it has much content more extensive than sRGB, as we view it.

The only argument I see as in need of consideration is Roger's, is it better to process in maximum available colour space and then reduce before printing or just let the printer trim it.

 

[3dogs]

I'm surprised that the 9000II is so bad. Virtually every (valid ) inkjet profile that I have generated over the years has exceeded sRGB in the green/cyan, and very often in the yellow/red too; and that even includes a lot of profiles for printable CD's, which are not the best media available!

AS for the comparison of the images in the video, I think you need to do the test yourself. I agree that in the video the background of the fishes appears to have more detail in the sRGB image. I don't know why this is, but I suspect is to do with the way the composite image is converted to sRGB. In my tests the reverse is the case. Here's a scan of two prints from my 3880. The LH one is ProPhotoRGB and the RH is sRGB. That's what I see, but I suggest you try it yourself on your 9000II. You may be surprised.
View attachment 2900

Roger I am in hopes that this is not a really silly question. If it is then your answer is going to advance my understanding of colour conversion by a huge leap.....so here goes......
The images in your post are in two different colour spaces that you can view and analyse on your equipment. In order to share that experience you have to convert to the colour space that the web is able to transmit - so we cant ever see your images as they are........
Is that correct??

 

[RogerB]

Roger I am in hopes that this is not a really silly question. If it is then your answer is going to advance my understanding of colour conversion by a huge leap.....so here goes......
The images in your post are in two different colour spaces that you can view and analyse on your equipment. In order to share that experience you have to convert to the colour space that the web is able to transmit - so we cant ever see your images as they are........
Is that correct??

Obviously needs a bit more explanation, but apologies in advance if this post gets a bit involved....

The image I included in post #10 was just a scan of two prints I made following the method described by Digital Dog. So, the prints were made from the two different colour spaces. The scanned image is actually in sRGB, so the image I posted is a fair representation of what I can see on the two prints. Your monitor should look much the same as mine so you should see better gradation and more contrast in the blue background on the ProPhoRGB print.

Prompted by @Emulator's latest post, I just did an experiment myself to see if my result was different from Digital Dog's. Here's the image I shot in RAW and converted ("developed") in Adobe Camera Raw using ProPhotoRGB. (All of the images below have been converted to sRGB for web posting.)



I then converted the same RAW file again, but this time using sRGB so I had two versions of the same image. In Photoshop I then placed the sRGB version in a separate layer on top of the PPRGB version and used a layer mask to reveal strips of the underlying PPRGB image. So, the sRGB layer looked like this, where the white strips are actually transparent.



Finally, here's a screen-shot of the two-layer image as seen in Photoshop. The arrows show the areas where the differences between PPRGB and sRGB are most obvious. Just for the record, the only colour here that can't be printed on my 3880, on glossy paper, is the deep blue at top right.



What I find interesting is that the colours that are lost in using sRGB are not at all extreme and you wouldn't normally consider them to be out of gamut. But, the camera can record them, and the printer can print them, so why throw them away?

 

[Emulator]

I am sorry but I find that post difficult to follow (as you warned).

I put together the three colour spaces on one image, showing my sRGB display calibration gamut (so this is a measured gamut using the ColorMunki Photo and DispcalGUI), against sRGB, Adobe1998 and ProPhoto colour spaces against the background CIExy colour space.

I haven't worked out how to display the printer gamut in a similar format.

 

[RogerB]

I am sorry but I find that post difficult to follow (as you warned).

Oh.... so I did get it wrong.....

You asked in an earlier post "Has anyone a ProPhoto colour space file apart from the Evaluation test .tif?" I was sort of trying to answer that by showing a direct comparison of working in PPRGB and sRGB, starting with the same information from my camera. I found that the PPRGB version gave more printable colours than the sRGB version - markedly so in the blue/cyan region. It's true that you wouldn't see these colours on your sRGB monitor, but that doesn't mean that you can't print them.

I put together the three colour spaces on one image, showing my sRGB display calibration gamut (so this is a measured gamut using the ColorMunki Photo and DispcalGUI), against sRGB, Adobe1998 and ProPhoto colour spaces against the background CIExy colour space.

I haven't worked out how to display the printer gamut in a similar format.

You can do it in Gamutvision like this (if it helps).

 

[RogerB]

Maybe this is simpler. I printed a section of the image three times on the same piece of paper. The first two are from the sRGB file and the third (bottom) is from the PPRGB version. This is a scan that matches pretty well what I see on the print.

 

[stratman]

The following article about Adobe RGB 1998 and sRGB cautions on the perception of gamut/color space denoting large differences: http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm.

The article answers some of the questions of @3dogs as well as sharpens the contrast between the two color spaces.

Perhaps this Adobe color space article may be of further benefit: http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/phscs2ip_colspace.pdf