PING: GROUP – Color Space; sRGBIEC61966-2.1 vc Adobe RGB 1998 /PS7.

"Ken Ellis" wrote in message

I was wondering if anyone had advice regarding which color space to use? Default is sRGB.. while it’s suggested that RGB 1998 is better; particularly with regard to color correction. I have switched my space to the second…but ironically when I open a pic from my SONY F707 digicam – it says it has sRGB info and do I want it coverted?
*Ques: is there any advantage to using sRGB if the pics have this info or should I let PS7 convert it to RGB 1998?

Stay with sRGB. That’s what your camera is tagging it as, what your printer will print as, what most every lab printer will use as the default output.

Adobe RGB for digital photography is vastly over rated.
—
"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and
religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the
government of any other." –John Adams
http://www.bobhatch.com

"Bob Hatch" wrote in
news:bp49k6$1i8e7f$:

"Ken Ellis" wrote in message

I was wondering if anyone had advice regarding which color space to use? Default is sRGB.. while it’s suggested that RGB 1998 is better; particularly with regard to color correction. I have switched my space to the second…but ironically when I open a pic from my SONY F707 digicam – it says it has sRGB info and do I want it coverted?
*Ques: is there any advantage to using sRGB if the pics have this info or should I let PS7 convert it to RGB 1998?

Stay with sRGB. That’s what your camera is tagging it as, what your printer will print as, what most every lab printer will use as the default output.

Adobe RGB for digital photography is vastly over rated.

Except, of course, that it yields considerably more vibrant color than sRGB.

I wondered why all the D-100 shots I was getting were so bland whilst my 10D shots were gorgeous. Applying aRGB answered that question.

Thanks for the advice Bob.

Regards

Ken

On Fri, 14 Nov 2003 20:21:29 -0800, "Bob Hatch" wrote:

"Ken Ellis" wrote in message

I was wondering if anyone had advice regarding which color space to use? Default is sRGB.. while it’s suggested that RGB 1998 is better; particularly with regard to color correction. I have switched my space to the second…but ironically when I open a pic from my SONY F707 digicam – it says it has sRGB info and do I want it coverted?
*Ques: is there any advantage to using sRGB if the pics have this info or should I let PS7 convert it to RGB 1998?

Stay with sRGB. That’s what your camera is tagging it as, what your printer will print as, what most every lab printer will use as the default output.
Adobe RGB for digital photography is vastly over rated.

Yes…since i posted this question I have experimented with some of the opening options presented by photoshop. When I initially open the pic in ‘adobe1998 space, it gives choices of maintaining sRGB or converting to current space, or discarding sRGB coding. When I "discard" the info I find the pic opens with a much greater color value; and more pleasing to the eye. "converting" did not yeild the same vividness. I suppose this will warrant a bit more scientific experimentation by myself..but there are definate differences. I don’t know at this point on how to address the print/output question. Any suggestions or advice would be appreciated; how do your turn out?

Kind Regards

Ken

On Sat, 15 Nov 2003 04:36:36 GMT, Eric Gill
wrote:

"Bob Hatch" wrote in
news:bp49k6$1i8e7f$:

"Ken Ellis" wrote in message

I was wondering if anyone had advice regarding which color space to use? Default is sRGB.. while it’s suggested that RGB 1998 is better; particularly with regard to color correction. I have switched my space to the second…but ironically when I open a pic from my SONY F707 digicam – it says it has sRGB info and do I want it coverted?
*Ques: is there any advantage to using sRGB if the pics have this info or should I let PS7 convert it to RGB 1998?

Stay with sRGB. That’s what your camera is tagging it as, what your printer will print as, what most every lab printer will use as the default output.

Adobe RGB for digital photography is vastly over rated.

Except, of course, that it yields considerably more vibrant color than sRGB.

I wondered why all the D-100 shots I was getting were so bland whilst my 10D shots were gorgeous. Applying aRGB answered that question.

Ken Ellis wrote in
news::

Yes…since i posted this question I have experimented with some of the opening options presented by photoshop. When I initially open the pic in ‘adobe1998 space, it gives choices of maintaining sRGB or converting to current space, or discarding sRGB coding. When I "discard" the info I find the pic opens with a much greater color value; and more pleasing to the eye. "converting" did not yeild the same vividness. I suppose this will warrant a bit more scientific experimentation by myself..but there are definate differences. I don’t know at this point on how to address the print/output question. Any suggestions or advice would be appreciated; how do your turn out?

I have yet to output anything at a photolab from sRGB; my camera captures in this space to begin with, and the D100 shots I get go into stuff that is offset printed in CMYK.

However, even in that very limited gamut colorspace, I find stuff converted from aRGB to CMYK is better saturated and the colors more vibrant than sRGB stuff. Some photographers get better color out of their D100s than others, but all of them benefit from the conversion.

This is a great surprise, as I thought devices that captured in sRGB sould truncate the colors, but it seems to be not the case.

It’s best to shoot RAW and fiddle with the colorspace and such when opening, of course, but I seldom get that option.

YMMV. I’m open to any methodology that might improve the situation.