Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > ICC Profiles, Web Browsers, and Your Images

Reply
Thread Tools

ICC Profiles, Web Browsers, and Your Images

 
 
Paul Furman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-25-2005
Maak wrote:

> Paul Furman wrote:
>>
>>Maak wrote:
>>
>>>I use a custom profile, but would never use sRGB because it is too much
>>>work
>>>to keep track of which file has which.

>>
>>Agreed. It is a hassle but ideally, use a PS action to convert for web
>>and convert the color space there. Only the small web files will be
>>sRGB. In practice, sometimes I create web images one by one manually and
>>it's an extra step to remember to convert the color space so I end up
>>not bothering with it. It's only for web use.
>>
>>In PS: Edit > Color Settings, you can set the working space to AdobeRGB
>>and have it alert you if anything funny comes in. That is not the
>>default behavior.
>>
>>
>>>Personally I think all files should be
>>>viewed in a general use program that does away with profiles as those are
>>>the
>>>most accurate.

>>
>>I disagree here. If you don't want to mess with color space then use
>>sRGB. If I'm reading this correctly.

>
>
> I only use my custom version of adobe RGB 98. I have used it for a very long
> time now. I also use a set custom cmyk conversion designed for use with
> different line screens and papers.


OK understood. Sounds like you worked out the system in detail already.
For sure it's a nightmare to mix & match, better to be consistent.


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Maak
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-25-2005
On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 17:20:48 -0500, Paul Furman wrote
(in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):

> Subject: Re: ICC Profiles, Web Browsers, and Your Images
> From: Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)>
> Date: Yesterday 5:20 PM
> Newsgroups: alt.binaries.photos.original, alt.photography,
> rec.photo.digital.slr-systems, rec.photo.digital
>
> Maak wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 24 Sep 2005 07:30:38 -0500, Steve Kramer wrote
>> (in article <(E-Mail Removed)>):
>>
>>>
>>> I know I usually shoot in Adobe RGB (9, process my work in
>>> PhotoShopCS2 in Adobe RGB (9 and change the output to CMYK if my
>>> clients require it. I switch to sRGB only if shooting for the Internet.

>>
>>
>> You are basically doing what I do. I do not switch though. I do not like
>> the
>> muted images.

>
> I usually don't bother for web stuff but isn't that the whole point of
> this discussion, that one should convert to sRGB to control the colors
> better. It looks from the OP's example that AdobeRBG actually looks more
> pale than sRGB in a typical browser. If you take the trouble to convert
> to sRGB, it gets a little more saturated in the browser.
> http://home.nc.rr.com/christianbonanno/webcolor/


I guess that might be true if you look at pictures in a browser and that is
your main method of looking. I certainly would not want to calibrate my
pictures to the way someone else's monitor's browser looks at them. But
really, I have never had problems with anyone viewing my files. They have
always looked good. I think the main problem comes when the files are way off
on white balance or the densities/latitude of the original photo are not
good. It all starts with what you have in the beginning. It is difficult to
make chicken feed out of chicken ****.

--
Jon Barry
Baton Rouge, La




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Jeremy Nixon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
Christian Bonanno <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>>> I'm not clear why in the Color Settings, there is no way to load a
>>> custom printer profile for CMYK Working Space, but in the Proof Setup
>>> it's possible to load a custom profile for the printer/paper
>>> combination.

>>
>> A printer profile is an output profile; you're not supposed to use them
>> as a working space. They are the equivalent of a monitor profile.

>
> What he is doing is called "Soft Proofing".


Soft proofing is the second part of what he said. You don't convert to
the output profile as a working space to soft proof, you set it in the
Proof Setup options.

--
Jeremy | http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeremy Nixon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> But, the US Web Coated SWOP thing is a very small gamut so I don't get
> why that would be the only available working space.


It's not the only available working space; I see 16 CMYK working space
profiles offered to me in color settings.

CMYK has a pretty small gamut, though; that's just what you have to work
with in that space. It does exceed sRGB *and* Adobe RGB in the dark areas,
of course, because of the different properties of ink-based and light-based
colors, and CMYK printing can make brighter yellows than RGB, but the total
gamut is not large. This is one reason why color separations for printing
are among the hardest things to do in image processing. Custom inks are
sometimes used to extend the range.

> But as I said, I don't really use CMYK so it's not a big deal for me, it
> just seems like that would really cripple the gaumt of the image more than
> necessary.


Well, the point is to give you the gamut that's going to be available to
you when you go to press.

--
Jeremy | (E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Furman
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
Jeremy Nixon wrote:
> Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>
>>But, the US Web Coated SWOP thing is a very small gamut so I don't get
>>why that would be the only available working space.

>
>
> It's not the only available working space; I see 16 CMYK working space
> profiles offered to me in color settings.


But they just look like different country's standards for offset
printing or coated vs uncoated (different paper?) all for offset
printing and as I understand inkjets have quite a larger range so by
working in that limited color space it chops the image down. I guess for
inkjet you just use an RGB color space.

> CMYK has a pretty small gamut, though; that's just what you have to work
> with in that space. It does exceed sRGB *and* Adobe RGB in the dark areas,
> of course, because of the different properties of ink-based and light-based
> colors, and CMYK printing can make brighter yellows than RGB, but the total
> gamut is not large. This is one reason why color separations for printing
> are among the hardest things to do in image processing. Custom inks are
> sometimes used to extend the range.
>
>
>>But as I said, I don't really use CMYK so it's not a big deal for me, it
>>just seems like that would really cripple the gaumt of the image more than
>>necessary.

>
>
> Well, the point is to give you the gamut that's going to be available to
> you when you go to press.


--
Paul Furman
http://www.edgehill.net/1
Bay Natives
http://www.baynatives.com
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jeremy Nixon
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-26-2005
Paul Furman <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I guess for inkjet you just use an RGB color space.


Yes, that's the idea. Most of the printers actually only accept RGB images
and do their own color separations.

--
Jeremy | (E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Differences in GCC and ICC compiled objects? relocatable. J K C Programming 6 02-23-2012 04:38 PM
No declaration and missing operator* in gcc 4.1.1, but not icc andgcc 3.3 Preben C++ 2 09-25-2006 09:23 PM
Images and ICC profiles David Bouchard Java 0 05-06-2005 08:00 AM
Building Python 2.4 with icc and processor-specific optimizations Michael Hoffman Python 3 03-14-2005 11:42 PM
ICC profiles for Nikon 8000, Canon i960 and Photoshop 7 C Digital Photography 3 12-29-2003 05:44 PM



Advertisments