Color Space

[michael_glavan]

I was looking at my menu options on my canon 20d and noticed the

color space options. What is the best setting to use and whats the

differance between sRGB and Adobe RGB? I herd that Adobe RGB has more

colors or something like that so what would i wanna use that for or

not use it for? Any help would be quite helpful.

 

thanks mike

[will king]

I would imagine it depends on what you want to do with your photos: upload to web or print. For web sRGB is ideal and for print RGB would be the better choice.

[steve_dunn2]

<p>The issue of what colour space to use comes up very frequently here so you should have no trouble finding dozens upon dozens of previous discussions of it.</p>

[KenPapai]

Color Space setting in your 20D is relevant only for shooting JPG.

If you shoot RAW you set your color space in the Raw image convertor (such as CS2's ACR). One of the "better" color spaces to convert to is the ProPhoto RGB, failing that the default and widest standard is the sRGB color space. (my view is that Adobe RGB causes more headaches for the unprepared user than it solves)

[rainer_t]

As a rule of thumb ... if you have to ask for the difference

between sRGB and Adobe-RGB, better stay with sRGB.

 

Rainer

[lovcom_photo]

Rainer, your smart @ss answer does not belong here...the poster had a legitimate question and deserves better then your smug arrogant answer. I would invite you to check out dpreview.com ;-)

[ericreagan]

I actually thought that Rainer's response was pretty accurate. ;)

<p>

I would like to refer you to a couple of discussions from last month that should give you more than enough reading material on this expansive topic. Look at <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00FzOG">this thread</a>.

<p>

Also take a look at <a href="http://www.smugmug.com/help/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-1998">smugmug's ggreat explanation</a>. It really is the best explanation I've seen on the topic. And I use the phrase "best explanation" because it explained to "me" why my prints didn't look the same as they did on my monitor.

<p>

I tried using AdobeRGB because of the bigger color space and consistently received washed out prints from Mpix.com and Myphotopipe.com. My problem was that Mpix and Myphotopipe use sRGB color space, as do most commercial printers, and I was losing a lot of the color information in the printing process.

<p>

Long story short, I only use sRGB because I either <a href="http://cyclingshots.blogspot.com">post my shots on the web</a> or <a href="http://www.myphotopipe.com">print them using Myphotopipe.com</a>. There's no reason for me to ever be in the AdobeRGB color space. I'd imagine that some of the pro's on here use AdobeRGB and either print their own or use a custom shop for their printing needs. I'd love to have a resource that categorically listed online photolabs' color spaces. Anybody seen that?

[rainer_t]

@Dan,

 

well, thank you very much for your kind and well choosen words Dan.

 

Rainer

[peter_rowe]

It's a tough question because the theory is different than practice. In theory Adobe RGB (aRGB) can show more colors and so looks like an obvious choice. But in practice it is unwieldy in that it's tricky to get all of the components of your workflow aligned with aRGB. CRT monitors for example diplay aRGB images poorly in that colors look flat and desaturated. You will see many posts here about flat images and oftentimes that comes from aRGB images. Printer drivers are mostly designed to accepted sRGB and are optimized to do their own color space conversion, and since the printer driver is intimately aware of the printer capabilities it does that job very well. In addition, many printers cannot print the additional aRGB color space colors anyway, or just a limited portion of it. Print services expect sRGB too, so if you hand in your CD-ROM of images it is best that they are in sRGB. The last piece is that a very minor tweak in post-processing will far outweigh any sRGB vs. aRGB difference. So it is hardly worth all the trouble to maintain consistent aRGB color space since digial images requite quite a bit of PP anyway. So, in practice it is difficult to demonstrate advantages to aRGB. Still, in theory you could. When you get really comfortably in sRGB have a go at aRGB. I did this and used it for some time but I found in the end that it was not worth all the trouble. Better to perfect your post-processing skills first as they will have far more impact on your results. Just my humble opinion.

 

--Peter

[pete w]

Michael

 

Think of a pie plate 6 inches round, the srgb color space fills approx. 85% of that

space,Adobe 1998 fills the whole plate and overspills it by 10 % so it can reproduce more

colors. The above is just an example but iy might help.

Here is what i do, I process everything in Adobe 1998 and 16 bit because I want to get the

most out of my photo possible, also I often shoot at very high iso's so everything and

every step is very important to me.

 

When I am done my work is when I make the decision as to what to do with it.

 

if going to a magazine or any kind of printing press it stays Adobe 1998 or becomes a

CMYK file.

 

If printing on my injet printer it stays Adobe 1998

 

if it goes out to a lab for prints it gets converted via batch to srgb as asked for by the lab.

 

If its for internet use it gets converted to srgb for proper display on most monitors.

It is as important to have your monitor calibrated as it is to take the picture as if its not

right its like working in the dark.

 

Take care, Pete

[peter_berger]

<p>Rainer is right. See <a href="http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00GFB2">this other recent thread</a> for more information.</p>

 

<p>It's not enough to just say "Ogg think adobe RGB have more pretty colors. Ogg use adobe." adobeRGB doesn't actually have more colors. Any given image in adobe RGB has the <em>same number</em> of colors in a <em>wider array</em>. This means that the bare statement "sRGB images lose more information than adobe RGB" ain't necessarily so: it depends on a number of factors, including the dynamic range of the image you're using, whether you're using an 8-bit or 16-bit workflow (hint: if you have to ask, you're using an 8-bit workflow). And, most importantly, the key question is what the output device is.</p>

 

<p>If you, like me, print most of your stuff on a Fuji Frontier or Noritsu printer at Costco, working in adobe RGB just adds needless complication and compromises the quality of the final image (particularly any web versions I split off). The advice "just use sRGB" is good advice.</p>

[michael_glavan]

To the people who wrote me back responses that had helpful information thank you very much, im still a little confused but your help was great. To the people with stupid responses that say if you dont know dont use it or however you worded your smart @ss answer, why do you even coment if it isnt gonna help the person asking the question. Forums are for people to help others who dont have as much knowledge as others might so they ask for help dont come on here if you have nothing but crap and smart @ss answers.

[peter_berger]

Michael,

 

I didn't see any answers in this thread that I would consider to be "smart ass." I saw a bunch

of people trying to help you. Why are you being rude?

 

Regards,

 

Peter

[robert_hall2]

Mike. If you shoot raw you will not need to think about color space until post-processing (photoshop). The images can be converted to lots of spaces without loosing the original raw image. sRGB is best for web and over-the-web printing. Printing is a whole different world with its own learning curve. For consumer grade printers, sRGB is probably best if you don't shoot raw. Use Adobe RGB if you have software that supports it for the printer you have. Two of the huge benefits of the 20d line are Raw and white balance control.

[craig_buckingham]

It is interesting that sRGB is specified for the Web. I would like to know where the colour bottle neck is in PC - web use.

 

I noticed when switching from sRGB to Adobe RGB that the greens improved out of sight on my monitor which is a nothing special LCD type. That is where the aRGb colour gamut is much expanded over sRGB. So my PC, operating system, application software and monitor all seem to handle the change from sRGB - aRGB.