sRGB or Adobe RGB Color Space or both?

Have always used sRGB Color Space. Came across an interesting article while looking for something else that was thought provoking. I don't do very much Post work, but would be interested in any perspective on the issue that you care to provide.

AdobeRGB is a wider color space than sRGB, closer to what your eye can perceive. sRGB is a narrow color space, which consequently has more contrast. It is mainly used for compatibility with non-color-managed displays and printing. You probably won't notice the difference with color-managed displays. I set my deliverables to sRGB, which is good enough for most purposes that don't require extensive processing. It looks better than AdobeRGB if your client doesn't subscribe to color management, while AdobeRGB might look rather flat.

 

One of the first things I do with a camera is to set the color space to AdobeRGB. Since I shoot mainly RAW images, it doesn't affect the image directly, but embeds that infomation which is used for subsequent processing.

What is your final output?

As for sRGB as ”useful” outside of color management, without color management, sRGB is a meaningless concept as explained below:

 

sRGB urban legend & myths Part 2

In this 17 minute video, I'll discuss some more sRGB misinformation and cover:

When to use sRGB and what to expect on the web and mobile devices

How sRGB doesn't insure a visual match without color management, how to check

The downsides of an all sRGB workflow sRGB's color gamut vs. "professional" output devices

The future of sRGB and wide gamut display technology

Photo print labs that demand sRGB for output High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/sRGBMythsPart2.mp4

Low resolution on YouTube:

If I were smart I would quit reading this now or I'm invariably change something that doesn't need to be changed just to see what happens.

If I were smart I would quit reading this now or I'm invariably change something that doesn't need to be changed just to see what happens.

Then do quit. ;)

I believe Sandy is interested in an answer based on colorimetric facts. Some provided thus far are a bit spotty, but other's who have an interest and wish to stick around can do so.

What is your final output?

As for sRGB as ”useful” outside of color management, without color management, sRGB is a meaningless concept as explained below:

 

sRGB urban legend & myths Part 2

In this 17 minute video, I'll discuss some more sRGB misinformation and cover:

When to use sRGB and what to expect on the web and mobile devices

How sRGB doesn't insure a visual match without color management, how to check

The downsides of an all sRGB workflow sRGB's color gamut vs. "professional" output devices

The future of sRGB and wide gamut display technology

Photo print labs that demand sRGB for output High resolution: http://digitaldog.net/files/sRGBMythsPart2.mp4

Low resolution on YouTube:

Thanks very much. I highly recommend the video for anyone interested in knowing more on the subject. My usage is probably unusual, and that of an enthusiast rather than a professional. It sounds as if the opportunities for me arise primarily in printing, and my annual Pro Bono job that others will want to print. Much appreciate your taking the time to share this information.

If you're printing, the last Working Space you want is sRGB.

There are millions of color managed wide gamut displays on iPhone's and iPads, wider gamut coming (here yet?) on Android. So Adobe RGB (1998) or it's close 'cousin' DCI-P3, much wider gamut, will show a visible difference on those devices and more, IF and when, colors fall outside sRGB.

sRGB is going the way of the dodo bird. It's been around since the early 90's. It's worthless on wide gamut devices san's color management as is any color space. On color managed devices/software, it brings nothing to the party which wider gamut color spaces can.

Either has zero role for capture of raw, other than the incorrect Histogram shown and an embedded preview which virtually every raw converter will ignore and then build it's own previews based on it's proprietary processing and how it deals with the raw data. Set your camera to whatever if you shoot raw, but when the rubber meets the road, it doesn't matter.

I don't use or plan to use any mobile devices, partly due to inclination, the rest due to lack of signal. I will set one of my cameras to Adobe RGB and see how it works on my printer. For the rest, I post photos on a few sites and share via Email with a few friends and family. Again, thank you. If I feel I can show clear improvement in output, I'll add info on my outcomes.

I don't use or plan to use any mobile devices, partly due to inclination, the rest due to lack of signal.

But your audience for images may, and again, depending on their devices, they can be wide gamut displays and color managed.

But your audience for images may, and again, depending on their devices, they can be wide gamut displays and color managed.

Good point!

So here's an image with lots of colors outside sRGB but of course, since it's in Adobe RGB (1998), no wider than Adobe RGB (1998) color gamut.

View it on an sRGB display and a wider gamut display, you'll see differences. Are they important differences? That's subjective. To me, yes.

http://www.digitaldog.net/files/2014PrinterTestFileFlat.tif.zip

Either has zero role for capture of raw

 

That's where I would start. You haven't said whether you shoot in raw or JPEG. If you shoot in raw format, the camera setting has zero impact on the data recorded. It does affect the histogram, as Andrew pointed out, so for that reason alone I set my camera to Adobe RGB.

 

Ed wrote:

 

Since I shoot mainly RAW images, it doesn't affect the image directly, but embeds that infomation which is used for subsequent processing.

 

I suppose it might depend on software, but with Adobe software, the last part isn't accurate. As far as I know (Andrew can confirm or disconfirm), Lightroom's initial rendering of a raw image is a function of the profile you set and is not affected by the color space you set i n camera. The initial rendering of white balance is affected by camera settings, but that is solely for purposes of an initial rendering and has no real impact. You can simply change the value.

I suppose it might depend on software, but with Adobe software, the last part isn't accurate. As far as I know (Andrew can confirm or disconfirm), Lightroom's initial rendering of a raw image is a function of the profile you set and is not affected by the color space you set i n camera. The initial rendering of white balance is affected by camera settings, but that is solely for purposes of an initial rendering and has no real impact. You can simply change the value.

The initial rendering in the ACR engine (LR or ACR) is based on many factors including presets, DCP profiles etc. What factor that isn't pertinent: camera settings like WB, picture styles or the color space set on the camera. The "As Shot" WB may be used (again, one can totally bypass that) but it's calculated uniquely and can differ visually and numerically from raw converter:

 

http://digitaldog.net/files/RawWB_Differences.jpg

Somebody tell me if I’m doing this wrong but:

 

I only shoot raw these days so I don’t worry about color space when shooting. Anything that’s for display on screens get exported in sRGB because that’s what most people’s displays are set to. If I’m going to print from an app other than what I processed it in, or export for another editor, that’s Adobe RGB.

Nothing wrong.

There are colors outside of Adobe RGB (1998) gamut many printers can print.

At the same time, no printer can print the entire gamut of sRGB.

For me: raw to ProPhoto RGB.

Nothing wrong.

There are colors outside of Adobe RGB (1998) gamut many printers can print.

At the same time, no printer can print the entire gamut of sRGB.

For me: raw to ProPhoto RGB.

I’ll try ProPhoto. I think everything I use supports that.

Sandy, assuming you shoot in RAW, I was always taught/told to set the widest color space in your raw processor as possible. That could be Adobe RGB or ProPhotoRGB. I also set Adobe RGB in my Nikon DSLRs, (but I am not sure this really matters if you shoot in RAW . ) The raw processor then uses all of the colors present to make the best color rendering as possible.

 

If your output is prints, then you need to make a file that has the color space needed by your printer. If that is sRGB then make a sRGB file from your RAW processed file as described above. And you need to use a profiled monitor and you need to use any printer profiles too.

 

If the output is to the web, most suggest you use sRGB to create the Jpeg. I do not do this. I make my web Jpeg images in Adobe RGB.

 

If you shoot in Jpeg I would pick the largest color space your camera allows. That could be Adobe RGB.

 

More info on this complicated/confusing subject is in the article below.

 

sRGB vs Adobe RGB vs ProPhoto RGB

What if you are having a pro printer do your print? Do they favor or recommend a particular gamut that works best for them?

I always shoot RAW, but I also save a jpg, small or large depends.

sRGB only if I am running out of space on the card,

 

You can always reduce the information saved if you save the larger file(s). It's really impossible to achieve best quality if you try to go the other way.

If your output is prints, then you need to make a file that has the color space needed by your printer. If that is sRGB then make a sRGB file from your RAW processed file as described above. And you need to use a profiled monitor and you need to use any printer profiles too.

There is no such thing as an sRGB printer. No printer can print all of the sRGB color gamut. sRGB is based on a theoretical CRT display circa 1994. sRGB has nothing to do with printers per se. By the time a print driver sends data to a printer, it's not sRGB or anything like it.

What if you are having a pro printer do your print?

Define 'Pro Printer".

Do they favor or recommend a particular gamut that works best for them?

Do "they" supply an output profile for their printers, do "they" allow you to convert to that output space, do "they" have a clue what a printer's color gamut is, or an RGB Working Space?

Define 'Pro Printer".

 

Do "they" supply an output profile for their printers, do "they" allow you to convert to that output space, do "they" have a clue what a printer's color gamut is, or an RGB Working Space?

"Pro printer" is an outside printing service. I don't own a printer. I would trying to select a form that I hope does good work.

 

I will be doing photo books for personal use. What's best for them?

 

Also, if I make a let's say 16x20" print to hang on the wall. It would be some company that handles printing for me.

 

As an aside, how do recommendations for scanning film differ from using digital photos? Should different gamuts be considered?

 

I guess from your questions, it would be best for me to call the printer and just ask them what I should do for their printing process. Other suggestions would be appreciated.

 

Thanks.

"Pro printer" is an outside printing service.

Ask specifically the one you hope to use.

You want someone here to answer your questions about all 'Pro Printers in outside services"? You're OK with a massive and incorrect generalization about all such companies? I will not assist in making up that false narrative even if that's what you wish to hear. IF you have a specific company, ask about that specific company. There are many differing workflows from "Just send us sRGB" (hope for the best) to "Here's our output profile, go at it with full color management".

I will be doing photo books for personal use. What's best for them?

Who's 'them'? When you answer that, ask them. :D

I guess from your questions, it would be best for me to call the printer and just ask them what I should do for their printing process.

Bingo! Unless again, you wish someone else here to manufacturer answers about everyone. As you know, I don't speak for everyone..... :eek:

"All generalizations are false, including this one." -Mark Twain

As an aside, how do recommendations for scanning film differ from using digital photos? Should different gamuts be considered?

Digital Cameras do not have a color gamut.

Scanners do and their scanner profiles define that color gamut.

Who's 'them'?

Them is a non-dangling pronoun specifically referring to the photo books in the previous sentence. Not a who but a what. The question is, "What's best for the photo books." My guess is that this will be hard to answer without more specific information. :)