Adobe RGB vs. sRGB for inkjet output

[joshua daniels]

I have working on a color management workflow for my HP 7960 and 8750

printers for some time, and recently had a custom profile made using

Eye One. The Gretag reference file is in sRGB color space. The

profiling work flow requires that you make no changes to the native

space and turn off color management in the printer driver.

Essentially, you get an sRGB output as a flow through from the sRGB

source. The remapping that Gretag performs is, therefore, based on sRGB.

 

I'm interested in gettins some perspectives how or whether one should

work in an sRGB space using this profile, or else start in Adobe RGB

and let the profile work its magic.

 

In the tests I've run, the profile on the HP produces a very accurate

match to the screen, especially if I soft proof using the custom profile.

 

The printed colors are quite accurate, if a bit muted (which I prefer

to intensified / saturated), but overall the color is a tad less than

vibrant.

 

I'm curious to hear other people's workflows with a G-M profile

compare to mine, esp. with regards to working color space and results.

[emre]

<blockquote> I have working on a color management workflow for my HP 7960 and 8750 printers for some time, and recently had a custom profile made using Eye One. The Gretag reference file is in sRGB color space. The profiling work flow requires that you make no changes to the native space and turn off color management in the printer driver. Essentially, you get an sRGB output as a flow through from the sRGB source. The remapping that Gretag performs is, therefore, based on sRGB.</blockquote>

I do not have this printer, but what is likely is that the profile was created to be used with the printer driver set to sRGB (I know EPSONs have such an option). If so, this does not mean your images have to be in sRGB; just that you have to use the sRGB mode in the driver (for consistency's sake).

 

<blockquote>The printed colors are quite accurate, if a bit muted (which I prefer to intensified / saturated), but overall the color is a tad less than vibrant.</blockquote>

There is a contradiction here; either the colors are accurate, or they are not. Maybe you are referring to the size of the gamut. A better profile will give you a wider range of colors.

[joshua daniels]

Thanks for your response. Yes, you are correct, strictly speaking: accurate is accurate, so one cannot complain! But what I meant to say was that the colors themselves are accurate, but not as rich as on screen - which would concur with your comment about color space. Since I'm looking at the image on screen in sRGB, this difference may owe more to the difference between reflective and transparent media.

 

You made one comment that I'm puzzled by:

 

"...what is likely is that the profile was created to be used with the printer driver set to sRGB (I know EPSONs have such an option). If so, this does not mean your images have to be in sRGB; just that you have to use the sRGB mode in the driver (for consistency's sake)."

 

I don't understand your comment: profiles are used in lieu of printer driver color management. Typically, one goes into PS and selects Print with Preview, and then from the drop menu, the color profile. In the printer driver, color management is turned off.

 

So, I'm not getting your point here.

[emre]

Ignore what I said if you disabled color management in the driver.

 

When you say you are looking at sRGB, are you referring to your working space, or to your monitor?

[joshua daniels]

The image coming into PS is in sRGB (from my Fuji S2), for example, and I'm not having it converted to the working space, which is Adobe 1998.

[emre]

You might as well stay in sRGB.

[chris_macaskill]

Sometimes you hear people say Adobe RGB is <em>bigger</em> or has <em>more colors</em>.<br><br>

 

Actually, they both have 256 red, 256 blue, and 256 green crayons because they are 8-bit color spaces.<br><br>

 

Adobe 98 is <em>broader</em>, meaning it spans a broader range of color, at the expense of fine increments. So if your file was once in sRGB, converting to Adobe 98 will not create colors represented by Adobe 98 that are not in your sRGB file. But it will have to take the fine increments of sRGB in the shadows and skin tones and map them into the bigger increments of Adobe 98. Nothing to gain there.<br><br>

 

The sRGB tide swept 99% of commercial print houses like EZ Prints, whcc and MPIX — but I see thousands of richly saturated prints coming from them, so it is very possible.

[mawz]

Adobe RGB is better for editing because of the larger space, especially if you work in 16bit

(It's less of a win in 8 bit mode due to the smaller number of colours possible). Both sRGB

and Adobe RGB are fine for printing because your printer's gamut will be smaller than either

of them. Note that neither Adobe RGB or sRGB will be able to display the most fully saturated

yellows that your printer can produce (This is common to almost all RGB spaces when

compared to a CMYK printer)

[erik scanhancer]

"The Gretag reference file is in sRGB color space." This should not be the case. It should

not be tagged with any color space information. Otherwise there isn't much use in making

a paper profile with it. A paper profile should describe the color space of the inks and not

be limited by the gamut of sRGB for example.

 

Have a look at this thread too (scroll down for my input):

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00CeYK

 

My own Eye-One profiles are very accurate and do not show any significant change in

saturation. Of course the paper/ink gamut is different from my screen's which does result

in some differences. When editing in Adobe RGB my screen is not able to reproduce certain

colors, while my printer is. Comparing the printer results to the colors of reality does give

very accurate color rendering though.

[joshua daniels]

I don't know WHY the Gretag target is in sRGB space, but it is. If I open it, I'm asked whether I want to convert to my (Adobe RGB) working space. If I say, "no" and just open the file, then look at the properties, the target is in sRGB.

 

Does anyone have this target who might be able to confirm my findings?

[erik scanhancer]

Joshua,

 

All my Gretag Macbeth targets that came with my Eye-One Photo are untagged RGB files.

My Photoshop says there is no profile embedded and it asks whether it should leave it that

way or not. I can then select not to color manage my targets, which actually results in

non-tagged open images. Those I print.