Camera settings for RAW and Photoshop CS3

<p>Hi <br>

I was wondering if it matters at all if my camera (D700) is set for <strong>sRGB</strong> or <strong>Adobe 1998 RGB</strong>? Does it really matter <strong>if</strong> I am shooting RAW? In RAW editing within Photoshop I can switch to Adobe 1998, anyway and RAW is really a negative so I don't think it should be affected by camera settings...<br>

Also, should I convert to <strong>ProPhoto RGB</strong> for best results?</p>

<p>Working with: Photoshop CS3, Bridge, MAC computer - iMac :), glossy :(</p>

<p>Thanks</p>

<p>A pro I just did a workshop with says he shoots in sRGB. The reason is that most of his work is for the web or on some sort of computer monitor and that this makes for a better looking image. Also it saves a step when preparing for web showing. If he's going to make a print, he converts to Adobe 1998 for processing. Is mindful that it is the vast minority of his images that he actually prints. Also reminded me that the color space of the printer is smaller than adobe, proPhoto, or sRGB as well. Convinced me. Check out the color sync utility on your mac for a graphic demonstration of the various color spaces. </p>

<p>One of the benefits of using Nikon software such as Capture NX is that you can use the camera settings to optimize the LCD display for critical viewing when chimping the images - sRGB, lots of sharpening, etc., and then over-write, if you want, all of these settings when you bring the RAW images into Capture NX. That way you get to see an image in the camera that may be closer to the final product without limiting your options. It is the best of both worlds. Of course Photoshop doesn't recognize the settings anyway so you need to repeat everything when it is used. Just remember the settings are not applied to the RAW files in-camera (whereas they <em>are</em> applied to the JPEG display and thumbnail); they are only an instruction set to be used by Capture NX.</p>

<p>Dhalia,</p>

 

<p>As Steve hints, it depends entirely on the intended result and your idea of a tolerable

workflow.</p>

 

<p> If I were a photojournalist shooting for a Web site, I’d shoot small sRGB JPEGs. But

I’m not; I tend to do more contemplative fine art kinds of things, so I shoot RAW.</p>

 

<p>When you shoot RAW, almost (but not quite) all the in-camera settings are irrelevant, with one

big caveat. They’re irrelevant because the raw converter, at most, only uses them as a

starting point. The caveat is that the on-camera preview images <strong>and histograms</strong>

are almost entirely dependent on the in-camera settings (including color space).</p>

 

<p>I think there are two basic approaches that make sense when shooting RAW. On the one hand,

you can set everything up as if you were shooting JPEGs to give you a rough idea of what the

finished result might be like. As a bonus, if you use DPP as your RAW converter, it’ll pick up

your in-camera settings, so you won’t have as much editing to do.</p>

 

<p>But my preferred approach is to adjust the in-camera settings so they emulate as much as

possible <em>the data as captured by the sensor.</em> I just today discovered the concept of

“Uni-WB,” and my first experiments make me pretty confident that that’s about

to become my new preferred technique.</p>

 

<p>The on-camera preview picture is nearly unrecognizable, but I was able to, with almost no fuss,

take a picture of an 11-stop scene (indoors with a window and white concrete in the sun outside)

without blowing the highlights or blocking the shadows. Frankly, I’m amazed. I

<em>finally</em> feel like I can know, with confidence, just how what I see on the histogram will

relate to what I can work with in Camera Raw!</p>

 

<p>Cheers,</p>

 

<p>b&</p>

<p>Nikon does some white balancing to the RAW file...<br>

You need to shoot the same, identical scene with both settings, and see what you get in your RAW processor.<br>

The colorspace setting will also affect the in-camera histogram...</p>

<p>I was wondering if it matters at all if my camera (D700) is set for <strong>sRGB</strong> or <strong>Adobe 1998 RGB</strong> ? ...Does it really matter <strong>if</strong> I am shooting RAW?</p>

<p>nope</p>

<p>In RAW editing within Photoshop I can switch to Adobe 1998, anyway and RAW is really a negative so I don't think it should be affected by camera settings...</p>

<p>correct.</p>

<p>Also, should I convert to <strong>ProPhoto RGB</strong> for best results?</p>

<p>yes, only if you fully understand why, if you are working in 16bits, and if youre images deserve such a workflow, such as really really amazing nature shot, high end portrait retouching, cosmetic campaing etc..for the regular Joe.. i rarely suggest it..even if you where a super regular Joe ; )</p>

<p>Working with: Photoshop CS3, Bridge, MAC computer - iMac :), glossy :(</p>

<p>if you have a control environement, i dont see the glossy as a problem? but if you still complain about it, many companie make some matte film for your laptop and / or Imac..just search google for a link (too tired to make it for you ; )</p>

<p> </p>

<p>I only use RAW capture.</p>

<p>I use Lightroom and Photoshop. Lightroom's only editing environment is, essentially, ProPhoto RGB, so I have LR set to auto-export to TIFF 16bit ProPhoto RGB when I round trip to Photoshop, and Photoshop's Color Settings are set to have ProPhoto RGB as the RGB working colorspace. Best match, widest editing flexibility, no problems.</p>

<p>The only caveat to working in ProPhoto RGB is to be sure you are working in 16bit per channel mode in Photoshop. ProPhoto RGB is too large a colorspace to be represented in 8bit, you lose values. If you need to work with something in 8bit per channel mode, convert to Adobe RGB first, then down sample to 8bit. That produces the minimum amount of losses. </p>

<p>Because I don't use any manufacturers' image editing software, and I capture only RAW format, the only settings that make any difference at all are ISO, Aperture, Exposure time, Focus, and Noise Reduction. ALL other settings in the camera are part of the image processing engine that affect only the JPEG previews and histogram display. I leave my camera set to the factory defaults for the image processing engine and have learned what the histogram display means in the context of RAW capture with those settings. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I was wondering if it matters at all if my camera (D700) is set for <strong>sRGB</strong> or <strong>Adobe 1998 RGB</strong>? Does it really matter <strong>if</strong> I am shooting RAW?</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>No, it makes absolutely no difference. In fact, anything other than ISO and exposure you set on the camera plays no role in the data captured within the Raw. Raw is Raw. Picture styles, White Balance settings etc, play no role on the Raw data. These are only metadata "suggestions" that a Raw converter may or may not even understand. Further, any feedback on the camera LCD is based on the Raw to JPEG in-camera conversion and is not giving you proper feedback on the Raw data (see http://www.digitalphotopro.com/technique/camera-technique/exposing-for-raw.html). </p>

<p>In terms of color spaces and what they provide AFTER rendering (you have to select something you want the Raw data converted into after rendering): <a href="http://www.adobe.com/digitalimag/pdfs/phscs2ip_colspace.pdf">The Role of working spaces in Adobe applicaitons</a></p>

<p>The lazy idea that sRGB is fine might apply to those that have little concern about how much data they will toss away when rendering, or those that only have Web/screen output. For the rest of us, it doesn't wash. </p>

<p>Thank you guys. <br /> I think my goals are very similar to yours to that of Ben's, Godrey's, & Andrew's. <br /> I shoot mostly landscapes, macro and I want my photographs to be their best and I am willing to spend the extra time and do the extra steps to include all the details that can be revealed on a quality print (though I understand that printers are limited at this time) and look good on the web. Not sure if starting with RAW will really make a difference for the web, but web is secondary. I would like my images to look good all around.<br /> What is Uni-WB? Is this setting in camera?<br /> Before today I have dismissed the CDs that came with my D700, so do you think it's worth trying out Capture NX2? It's a trial version. Or should I just stick to Photoshop for now? or perhaps if I were to invest in one more editing software would I be better off with adding Lightroom or Nikon Capture NX?</p>

<p>OK, so what should I leave my settings on, even when it does not matter? maybe sRGB since once in a while I do take some unimportant JPEGs?</p>

<p>The workflow would be to produce the highest quality master image (ProPhoto RGB, 16-bit, highest pixel data), then spin off an iteration in sRGB for the web, at a size you wish. Very easy to do in Lightroom with the export presets. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>

 

 

<p>OK, so what should I leave my settings on, even when it does not matter? maybe sRGB since once in a while I do take some unimportant JPEGs?</p>

 

 

 

</p>

</blockquote>

For a Raw+JPEG (assuming you find that useful, I don't) or the occasional JPEG capture, sure, you can leave it set at sRGB and the Raws are unaffected. Or you could set it for Adobe RGB (1998) and save an sRGB iteration assuming you wanted to print it on a modern printer and take advantage of the wider color gamut but also wanted sRGB for web.

 

Bottom line, set it for Adobe RGB (1998), you can get that AND sRGB. Set it for sRGB, that's all you get. You can move from a larger color space to a smaller one. You can't go the other way.

<blockquote></blockquote>

<p>Should I archive images as ProPhoto RGB in 16bit after tuning, or can I then change to 8bit to save space, since I can always change to 16bit?<br>

Also, is LR better for working on 16bit ProPhoto RGBs? It's just that I feel limited in PHotoshop CS3. When working in the Camera RAW within Photoshop, then any exposure adjustments I do, still seem to keep all the details in the histogram, but after clicking "Open Image" for working on layers, filters, etc... say I need to adjust Levels, then the histogram looks very poor, details are clipped! That's why I try to do all exposure editing in the RAW window, but it's somewhat of a limitation. <br>

Also, I am now wondering what is "Photoshop raw"? If I edit in the RAW window of PHotoshop and click done, then images still keep same extension as in camera .NEF, but if editing in the regular Photoshop and Saving As, then my only raw option becomes .raw</p>

 

<p>I export (render) Raws at max native rez in 16-bit, ProPhoto RGB then do any additional pixel editing in Photoshop. That's my master archive I spin off any smaller sized or smaller color space images for. LR isn't "better" at working on 16-bit ProPhoto RGBs per say. Its a Raw converter that will provide this or iterations easily or you can do this from Photoshop. LR doesn't support layers. That is, you can catalog layered TIFFs in LR (say your archive) and spin off these iterations but they will be flattened which is probably fine anyway. Any edits you make in LR or ACR to a layered document results in a new version that is flat. <br>

NEFs are, as far as Photoshop or any Adobe product is concerned, read only. The data is used to create a pixel based, RGB document and the original Raw is untouched. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>OK, so what should I leave my settings on, even when it does not matter? maybe sRGB since once in a while I do take some unimportant JPEGs?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>If you only shoot RAW then, as others have pointed out, it doesn't matter what colour space you set your camera to. However, if you shoot JPEGs occasionally, or RAW+JPEG, then it may matter which you choose.<br>

I shoot RAW+JPEG regularly for the simple reason that I can quickly view the JPEGs on any PC I may have access to, such as at work. For this reason I set my camera to sRGB so that those JPEGs will look as intended using any image viewer at my disposal. If my camera was set to AdobeRGB then I would need a colour space aware image viewer and without which my images will look dull and lifeless.<br>

For your once in a while unimportant JPEGs I recommend setting your camera to sRGB.<br>

Regards, <br /> Bryan</p>

<p>Ok, so this is what I understand now:<br>

To retain most quality I should edit in ProPhoto RGB 16bit. <br>

But. Can I switch between 8bit and 16bit without change in quality as long as I don't edit in 8bit? <br>

I would like to edit in 16bit and once done change to 8bit sRGB and archive. If one day I feel like more editing is needed I can go back to 16bit without any loss in quality, right?<br>

Thanks</p>

<p>Leave master in high bit, wide gamut space. Convert to smaller size, smaller color space, smaller bit depth to spin off version when the need arises, leaving master alone (use save as). </p>

<p>Thank you.</p>