Embedded color photoshop 7

D
Posted By
Davo
Oct 14, 2004
Views
323
Replies
14
Status
Closed
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid of it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.
ds


,
Replace here_too with bigpond

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

C
Corey
Oct 14, 2004
Try going to your Photoshop help and looking up Color Management or Profile. Color Management Systems or Modules try to maintain color accuracy between devices like scanners, printers, digital cameras, etc. By sticking to a particular color profile, the translation of colors is accurately maintained.

Try selecting each of the options in the popup and see if you see any noticeable changes. After each time, note the appearance and then close the document without saving so the same pop-up appears for the next choice. My guess is you won’t see that big of difference, if any. To keep it from popping up, save the file with the color profile box checked in the save panel..

Corey 🙂

"Davo" wrote in message
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid
of
it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.
ds


,
Replace here_too with bigpond

MR
Mike Russell
Oct 14, 2004
Davo wrote:
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid of it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.

Click on number 2.


Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com
www.geigy.2y.net
N
nomail
Oct 14, 2004
Mike Russell wrote:

Davo wrote:
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid of it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.

Click on number 2.

Why not number 1?


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
MR
Mike Russell
Oct 14, 2004
Johan W. Elzenga wrote:
Mike Russell wrote:

Davo wrote:
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid of it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.

Click on number 2.

Why not number 1?

For that matter, 3 is sometimes the wisest choice. He asked for a simple solution, and I suggested the one I think will always give acceptable results.


Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com
www.geigy.2y.net
H
Hecate
Oct 15, 2004
On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 17:03:30 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Mike Russell wrote:

Davo wrote:
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid of it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.

Click on number 2.

Why not number 1?

Well, that’s going to depend on what your output is intended to be. SO you’re both right, in a way. 🙂



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
N
nomail
Oct 15, 2004
Mike Russell wrote:

Johan W. Elzenga wrote:
Mike Russell wrote:

Davo wrote:
When I go to open a graphic the following box pops up.
"The document img *** jpg has an embedded profile that does not match thecurrent rgb working space."
Embedded sRGBiec61966.2.1
Working Adobe RGB (1998)
It then says "How do you want to proceed"

!. Use the embedded profile (instead of the working space)
2.Convert documents colors to the working space
3.Discard the embedded profile (dont color manage).
Could someone please tell me what the hell this means and how to get rid of it.

Please make the answer simple cause I am on a steep learning curve. Many thanks.

Click on number 2.

Why not number 1?

For that matter, 3 is sometimes the wisest choice. He asked for a simple solution, and I suggested the one I think will always give acceptable results.

Sure, but leaving sRGB the way it is will also always give acceptable results. Besides, what is there to gain in converting sRGB to AdobeRGB anyway?


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
N
nomail
Oct 15, 2004
Hecate wrote:

Why not number 1?

Well, that’s going to depend on what your output is intended to be. SO you’re both right, in a way. 🙂

Is that so? You can convert sRGB to AdobeRGB, but that will not change the fact that all the colors will still be within the ‘sRGB range of colors’. What isn’t there in the first place, will not magically appear by changing the color space.


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
N
nomail
Oct 15, 2004
Johan W. Elzenga wrote:

Click on number 2.

Why not number 1?

For that matter, 3 is sometimes the wisest choice. He asked for a simple solution, and I suggested the one I think will always give acceptable results.

Sure, but leaving sRGB the way it is will also always give acceptable results. Besides, what is there to gain in converting sRGB to AdobeRGB anyway?

Maybe I should add one more thing. Most people don’t realise this, but converting an 8 bits image to a wider color space could actually cause you to *loose* color information! This may sound silly, but it isn’t. You need ‘to make room’ for the extra colors of the wider color space, so the original colors must be compressed.

You can easily see this by doing the following experiment. Open an new document in sRGB. Paint two red areas, one with RGB 251,0,0 and the other 250,0,0. Place a color marker in both areas. Convert to AdobeRGB. Look at the color markers in the two areas. Both colors are now 215,0,0. It may not be visible on your monitor, but you’ve lost color detail.

Conclusion: Convert if you have to, but don’t convert if there is no good reason. I see no reason to convert sRGB to AdobeRGB, just because AdobeRGB happens to be your default color space. On the contrary: you may loose detail and if you want to use your images on the web later, you’ll have another problem (if you don’t convert them back to sRGB).


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
H
Hecate
Oct 16, 2004
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:57:35 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Hecate wrote:

Why not number 1?

Well, that’s going to depend on what your output is intended to be. SO you’re both right, in a way. 🙂

Is that so? You can convert sRGB to AdobeRGB, but that will not change the fact that all the colors will still be within the ‘sRGB range of colors’. What isn’t there in the first place, will not magically appear by changing the color space.

Ah, but you’re assuming nothing is done with the image (in which case, why open it in PS in the first place?). However, assuming you are purposing for the web, then sRGB is fine. If however, you are making alterations to the image for printing, then AdobeRGb gives you a better match to the CMYK your printer prints out with.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
H
Hecate
Oct 16, 2004
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 12:57:34 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Sure, but leaving sRGB the way it is will also always give acceptable results. Besides, what is there to gain in converting sRGB to AdobeRGB anyway?

Printing.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
N
nomail
Oct 17, 2004
Hecate wrote:

Well, that’s going to depend on what your output is intended to be. SO you’re both right, in a way. 🙂

Is that so? You can convert sRGB to AdobeRGB, but that will not change the fact that all the colors will still be within the ‘sRGB range of colors’. What isn’t there in the first place, will not magically appear by changing the color space.

Ah, but you’re assuming nothing is done with the image (in which case, why open it in PS in the first place?). However, assuming you are purposing for the web, then sRGB is fine. If however, you are making alterations to the image for printing, then AdobeRGb gives you a better match to the CMYK your printer prints out with.

In theory, yes. But in practice there is no difference between an sRGB image and an AdobeRGB image that was created by converting an sRGB image. What is the change that your editting would create colors that are in the AdobeRGB space but outside sRGB space? I’d say pretty low. In fact, the AdobeRGB image may even be slightly inferior (see my other post about loosing color nuances if you convert to a wider color space).


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
H
Hecate
Oct 17, 2004
On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 19:09:36 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Hecate wrote:

Well, that’s going to depend on what your output is intended to be. SO you’re both right, in a way. 🙂

Is that so? You can convert sRGB to AdobeRGB, but that will not change the fact that all the colors will still be within the ‘sRGB range of colors’. What isn’t there in the first place, will not magically appear by changing the color space.

Ah, but you’re assuming nothing is done with the image (in which case, why open it in PS in the first place?). However, assuming you are purposing for the web, then sRGB is fine. If however, you are making alterations to the image for printing, then AdobeRGb gives you a better match to the CMYK your printer prints out with.

In theory, yes. But in practice there is no difference between an sRGB image and an AdobeRGB image that was created by converting an sRGB image.

In practice, I don’t agree.

What is the change that your editting would create colors that are in the AdobeRGB space but outside sRGB space? I’d say pretty low.

Not at all. A few curve changes and you can easily be outside sRGB which is a very narrow colour space.

In
fact, the AdobeRGB image may even be slightly inferior (see my other post about loosing color nuances if you convert to a wider color space).

I saw it. I saw no point in disagreeing yet again .



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui
N
nomail
Oct 18, 2004
Hecate wrote:

In theory, yes. But in practice there is no difference between an sRGB image and an AdobeRGB image that was created by converting an sRGB image.

In practice, I don’t agree.

It would be helpful to explain why.

What is the change that your editting would create colors that are in the AdobeRGB space but outside sRGB space? I’d say pretty low.

Not at all. A few curve changes and you can easily be outside sRGB which is a very narrow colour space.

Sure, and you probably loose most of that again when converting to the printer space, which is usually just as narrow. I doubt that you will *see* a difference in prints between editting in sRGB or AdobeRGB in print when the starting image was in sRGB.

In fact, the AdobeRGB image may even be slightly inferior (see my other post about loosing color nuances if you convert to a wider color space).

I saw it. I saw no point in disagreeing yet again.

If you convert from sRGB to AdobeRGB, your original 255 shades of red will be reduced to 219 shades. If you disagree with that fact, I would be really interested to know why. Don’t you believe what Photoshop is telling you?


Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/
H
Hecate
Oct 19, 2004
On Mon, 18 Oct 2004 13:23:54 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Hecate wrote:

In theory, yes. But in practice there is no difference between an sRGB image and an AdobeRGB image that was created by converting an sRGB image.

In practice, I don’t agree.

It would be helpful to explain why.

Because an AdobeRGB file has the potential to be better than an sRGB file.

What is the change that your editting would create colors that are in the AdobeRGB space but outside sRGB space? I’d say pretty low.

Not at all. A few curve changes and you can easily be outside sRGB which is a very narrow colour space.

Sure, and you probably loose most of that again when converting to the printer space, which is usually just as narrow. I doubt that you will *see* a difference in prints between editting in sRGB or AdobeRGB in print when the starting image was in sRGB.

Well, see, no you don’t. You’re much more likely to lose colour from an sRGB because the profile doesn’t match CMYK as well as AdobeRGB.

And yes, I *do* see a difference because the Adobe colour space conversion to CMYK results in less out of gamut colours.
In fact, the AdobeRGB image may even be slightly inferior (see my other post about loosing color nuances if you convert to a wider color space).

I saw it. I saw no point in disagreeing yet again.

If you convert from sRGB to AdobeRGB, your original 255 shades of red will be reduced to 219 shades. If you disagree with that fact, I would be really interested to know why. Don’t you believe what Photoshop is telling you?

Because you’re assuming that nothing is done with the file after the conversion and, as I said, there is no point in even taking the file into PS in the first place if you’;re not going to do anything with it.



Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections