How to Change Color Space on D80 (color space, sRBG or Adobe RBG)

[jen_sladkov]

<p>hello again.<br>

i just wanted to change the color space from sRBG to Adobe RBG in my D80 and unfortunaly.. couldn't find it..<br /> Please can you guide me to do that.<br>

Thanx a lot!</p>

[photo5]

<p>Shoot RAW and do it in post. If you're shooting JPG's only, I'd actually leave it on sRGB as that is what you'll need for printing and posting online. Adobe RGB is a wider color gamut, but that doesn't mean it is better than sRGB. Adobe RGB is only better if you plan to do high-end printing. If all you need is 4x6" prints, or posting to the web, sRGB is the better choice.<br>

You really should be shooting RAW with the D80 anyway, as the quality is far better than the JPG files it produces in camera. I always shot RAW+JPG with my D80 and got good results.</p>

[nsfbr]

<p>Dave: </p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>"Adobe RGB is only better if you plan to do high-end printing." </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not true. Where it matters is in editing. Being able to manipulate the image with a wide gamut means that clipping is less likely through all the intermediate steps. Prior to printing, the gamut needs to be changed anyhow to the printer's gamut, so neither sRGB nor Adobe would be used to print properly (although, many print kiosks assume sRGB, so when printing at these places sRGB is what should be used).</p>

[andylynn]

<p>OTOH there is no <em>more</em> color data in Adobe RGB than in sRGB - this is determined by bit depth, not color space. They just use different mappings from the data to the colors. In addition to print shops, your monitor, Windows or OSX, and most of your software assume sRGB unless you're in a calibrated workflow. Setting this up is a lot more work than reward. </p>

<p>You will lose quality when your color spaces conflict, so unless you really know that you need Adobe RGB, you want sRGB. Trying to use Adobe RGB and getting weird color is something everybody goes through at some point, but you can save yourself the trouble.</p>

[photo5]

<p>Joel, that assumes you have a monitor that can display the Adobe RGB color space. The only ones I know of are very high end Eizo panels.<br>

Andrew, I have to agree. sRGB is the more compatible color space overall.</p>

[CharlesBecker-Toronto]

<p>Jen-color space is found in the shooting menu. (P.S. it's RGB-not RBG). cb :-)</p>

[stillbound]

<p>many shoot raw because in the future they MAY need that material - the color space issue is the same. Printers and monitors are finally catching up with the cameras and adobe is capable of more shades...<br>

better overall for the future<br>

JC</p>

[JDMvW]

<p>Shooting sRGB assumes that your current usage is all you will <em><strong>ever</strong> </em> want to do with the files. Adobe RGB gives more data, and it is simplicity itself to go from that to sRGB where that's all you need.</p>

<p>IMO shooting sRGB is like shooting sRAW, the latter saves space, but why would you want to shoot RAW at all, if that's what you're worried about? In the case of color, why not record the option with more information, rather than one with less information. You can always dumb down a file, but you can never regain information you've never recorded.</p>

<p>Finally, as I recall, Ken Rockwell believes there is no point to shooting Adobe RGB.</p>

[ellis_vener_photography]

<blockquote>

<p>Finally, as I recall, Ken Rockwell believes there is no point to shooting Adobe RGB.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And he doesn't believe in using a tripod.<br>

And he doesn't believe in using raw formats.</p>

<p>Of course not shooting raw and not using you a tripod when you can insures that you have backed yourself into a narrow corner quality wise, but it certainly makes life easier. And for some people that is absolutely fine. But so does eating pablum and mashed bananas.</p>

<p>And yes there is a broader spectrum of color in Adobe RGB(1998) it can contain more saturated color like those yo ufind in nature than in sRGB.</p>

[Spearhead]

<blockquote>

<p>Of course not shooting raw and not using you a tripod when you can insures that you have backed yourself into a narrow corner quality wise</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Lots of pro PJs and sports shooters shoot this way without getting hurt quality-wise. Like everything, it's relative to what you are doing, how you work, and how you control what you do.</p>

[Ray House]

<p>Jen, nobody answered your question... here's your answer. Go into shooting menu (the green camera at the top), then to Optimize image, scroll down to Custom, then to Color mode, this will give you a choice of 1a (sRGB low saturation), II (Adobe RGB) or IIIa (increased saturation). If you do manipulations or adjustments in software and you want the most control use Adobe RGB. If you want portrait type color use Ia. If you are shooting nature and want the colors enhanced use IIIa. I think a good idea for comparison is to use RAW+JPEG.<br>

For my serious shots I like to use only RAW and for family gatherings and casual I use JPEG and Ia color space. Hope this helps, Ray</p>

 

[jen_sladkov]

<p>Thank you all for the info.<br>

Ray, you are the best.</p>

[ramon_v__california_]

<p>as a retired pj, i totally agree with jeff s. ---- it's total control of what you do and how you do things. i know i might be losing a lot of fun (and maybe knowledge) but i only shoot raw in controlled studio pictorials and portraits. with serious shoots like weddings (grand and small) and other events, it's large and fine jpeg.<br>

thanks ray for answering jay's question :-)</p>

[ShunCheung]

<p>Thanks to Ray and Charles for answering the OP's (Jen) question.</p>

[andylynn]

<blockquote>

<p>Shooting sRGB assumes that your current usage is all you will <em><strong>ever</strong> </em> want to do with the files. Adobe RGB gives more data, and it is simplicity itself to go from that to sRGB where that's all you need.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>No. No no no no no no no and no. This is the most common misconception out there about this. Either color space can be used for any of the common bit depths (8 bits per chanel or 16 bits per channel usually) and therefore contain the <em>exact same amount of color data</em> . The difference is only in how the numbers map to colors.</p>

<p>Adobe maps wider and sRGB puts more data into gradations in some areas where Adobe lacks. Convert from sRGB to Adobe and you miss some of those colors Adobe puts more data into, and vice versa. When you convert from one mapping to another you always lose. 99% of people should never do anything to their color space settings.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>And he doesn't believe in using a tripod.<br /> And he doesn't believe in using raw formats.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Both are perfectly reasonable if you don't like carrying a lot of stuff and want to save hard drive space.</p>

[ShunCheung]

<blockquote>

<p>"i just wanted to change the color space from sRBG to Adobe RBG in my D80 and unfortunaly.. couldn't find it.."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Folks, Jen merely wants to find out how to change the setting from sRGB to Adobe RGB on her D80, and that has been answered.</p>

<p>This thread is not about which color space is "superior" or whether one should shoot JPEG or RAW. Those topics have already been debated a lot in photo.net. I have updated the thread title to better indicate the original question.</p>