What color space does the 3880 really cover?

[W. Fisher]

Sort of curious as one printer I use says "It is no better than sRGB and why they only take image files in sRGB and not Adobe 1998 or ProPhoto as they are a waste and lose some colors."

I thought the 3880 was a full Adobe 1998 RGB printer (or maybe it was the monitor?), but seems ColorThink Pro 3 says otherwise with some Epson Glossy. It might be a bit more than sRGB in the green/yellow, but falls far short on the Blue/Purple side in the attached Luv image (e.g. Wireframe is sRGB, and the solid is the print ICC profile made with the i1 PhotoPro and its Profiler software.).

If it is a paper limitation, do any papers with the 3880 fall fully outside the sRGB pattern? Curious too if the new Cone deeper black PK soon to appear will show any improvement too.

W.F.

 

[Roy Sletcher]

Not quite sure what you are saying!

A colour space, in simplistic terms, is a container that defines the range of colours that fit into that colour space. (ie Prophoto, sRGB, and AdobeRGB1998 being the main colour spaces used for photographic colour printing - There are others.)

You may be confusing colour space with the printer's Gamut which can vary depending on substrate, colourant, profile quality, setup and a few other factors. Again overly simplified for brevity.

If your posting is because are interested in reproducing good quality colour images, and the print maker requests sRGB files, then RUN (Not walk) away. He does not know what he is doing and is undoubtedly producing sub-optimal results.

The WWW has screeds of data on this subject. Google is your friend.

rs

 

[W. Fisher]

Just curious as to what color space the 3880 can really fill. My rough understanding is it cannot fill an Adobe 1998 space/gamut/whatever no matter what or how good your profile or combo is. sRGB seems the limit for mine.

I found something on Breathing Color's blog where the author found much the same as me: The best profile doesn't even really fill the sRGB color space. It can punch through on some sides, but for the most part, the 3880 is is well inside the sRGB space. Her cartoon sounds like mine where the lab said to "Just provide a JPG with the sRGB space" too.

http://www.breathingcolor.com/blog/guide-to-digital-printing-part-2/#disqus_thread
http://www.breathingcolor.com/blog/guide-to-digital-printing-part-2/#disqus_thread
I read some posts in the Qimage Ultimate forum where their mods also suggested sRGB and don't bother with Adobe 1998 for printing with QImage.

W.F.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

there is so much stuff published to this subject, just search this forum for 'AdobeRGB', with one reference
here http://www.printerknowledge.com/threads/so-why-dont-we-just-dial-in-srgb.10055/page-4#post-83592

There are ink/paper combinations which can go beyond AdobeRGB in a particular range, sRGB is not the limit.
The discussion needs to cover more than just the printer but the complete workflow from the generation of the image, the RAW conversion through post processing to the print finally - all that needs to be done in AdobeRGB to make sense at all.
Epson drivers offer a choice of sRGB or AdobeRGB, that's a setting how the driver interprets the color values of the RGB data, but does not imply that they fully cover either color space.

Cone inks may be pretty good, but improving the black level -let me say from L=6 to L=4 on a particular paper - won't mean much to sRGB or AdobeRGB but impacts the correct working of the black point compensation if you use that option in Qimage or elsewhere.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm not really getting the essence of that breathingcolor blog, the more people you ask the wider the responses will be - from garbage to something more knowledgable. When I display a profile with an L800 printer, Fujifilm Drylab inks, on a Tecco Photo Glossy paper I get this

the sRGB, the AdobeRGB colorspaces and the actual printer profile not filling those everywhere but exceeding them in the green range, and lots of other profiles look quite similar. So what does that mean now ? I once sent a profile patch sheet to a photo lab, their color space was smaller than mine with an inkjet printer.

 

[W. Fisher]

ISF, thanks for the image. Sort of matches my findings where the greens punch through the sides of the sRGB standard or frame while falling within in it in other colors.

While talking to one of the Eizo rep's at a conference, he mentioned their new CG series is more than 100% of the Adobe 1998 RGB colorspace, but it falls short in one area of the green so they call it 99% rather than saying it covers 104% or whatever it really covers. I'll attached a overlay of their CG-248 4K, a new IPS notebook with nvidia 980M graphics card, and the Adobe 1998 RGB gamuts. You can see the Eizo's solid green one where it is inside the bounds of the colored (i.e. rainbow) Adobe 1998 RGB colorspace in the small green area in the upper left where it falls a bit short so they stayed with 99% rather than get into some marketing super-hype. He mentioned the new HP DreamColor series did cover that small portion so they can make the claim of 100% Adobe 1998, but whether it covers more of the area than theirs he didn't know. They may have added a bit more green to hit it for 100% Adobe RGB, but maybe less in the magentas than theirs, etc. Dunno.

From that, I have my suspicion that my Epson 3880 may only be something on the order of 75% sRGB going through all my profiles. I don't know if our printers will ever get to 100% RGB or even 100% sRGB, aside from the occasional punch-through of some color beyond the sRGB confines. ProPhoto maybe a decades off pipe dream for monitors and printers.

With that in mind, I also question Photoshop's "Soft-proofing" since I made a panorama last night and soft-proof said that the blue sky was out of gamut. Print looked fine though so maybe whatever Adobe sets up for Soft-Proofing isn't that accurate since they don't seem to be linked to the ICC profiles I make? For fun, I Soft-Proofed the sRGB and Epson Glossy Paper gamut in ColorThink Pro (attached image) and to my surprise, much of that was shown as out of gamut in gray was the greens. Really?!!? Soft-proofing seems more of a slick parlor trick, but how useful it is for the printer is up for grabs unless it specifically compares the print ICC profile to that of the screen. Since I print from Qimage and not from Adobe's software, I don't know if that is a setting within PS or LR to allow for accurate soft-proofing based on a self-made ICC paper/ink profile.

W.F.

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm barely using a softproof function, and I'm overall quite happy with the printing output at this time. I remember when Epson upgraded to the vivid magenta Ultrachrome ink version, I tested it, yes - it extends the gamut in the magenta corner somewhat and measurable but it was only visible in direct comparison between images with saturated magenta sections - flowers - fashion fabrics, but the fuss around that new ink was just too much - I think it was at a Photokina exhibition longer time ago. If you want to get more gamut out of printing you probably have to move to printers with higher pigment density - solvent inks etc, but that's a diffferent equipment and pricing range altogether

 

[Roy Sletcher]

From that, I have my suspicion that my Epson 3880 may only be something on the order of 75% sRGB going through all my profiles. I don't know if our printers will ever get to 100% RGB or even 100% sRGB, aside from the occasional punch-through of some color beyond the sRGB confines. ProPhoto maybe a decades off pipe dream for monitors and printers.

It is very difficult to conduct a discussion of this nature in brief forum messages.

Possibly the link below may help clarify the 3880 gamut v sRGB as it is specifically covered in the video. If you don't wish to watch the entire clip the relevant part comes at about 7.45mins. I have attached a JPG illustrating the larger 3880 gamut from the video. The JPG is the gamuts superimposed on the spectrum locus. This is because the 3D rotating plots do not work well on a 2D display.

TREATISE ON COLOUR GAMUT
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0bxSD-Xx-Q


The following link is to establish the author's credibility. Important factor when a lot of our references are based on things like"..it must be true, I saw it on the internet."

https://www.linkedin.com/in/digitaldog


This message is an attempt to helpfully clarify the 3880 printed gamut. I have not addressed the known and documented problems of Photoshop's "Out of Gamut" bugs. Hopefully v2015.5 may address some of those issues, but seeing as the problem has existed for some 10 or years don't hold your breath

Hope this message is helpful

rs

 

[The Hat]

@W.Fisher, I reckon you’re just over thinking the sRGB situation and you’ll end back where you started..

 

[Ink stained Fingers]

I'm aware of the publications by Andrew Rodney and how he explains all details of color mgmt, color spaces etc to a wide audience, but I'm missing here and there some advise how the non-professionals can make easy use of the capabilities of Photoshop etc in this respect without having Colorthink open at the side to analyze this and to consider that , and to reconsider all the theoretical aspects he addresses. It's not just to discourage the user not to use sRGB anymore and to show the gamut limits of the 3880. I'm glad I don't have a 3880 with these restrictions - o.k. - I have other printers with even more limits....and I can live with them