Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Digital Photography > AdobeRGB or sRGB?

Reply
Thread Tools

AdobeRGB or sRGB?

 
 
bigfeet
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2006
First of all, thank you to all those that helped with my earlier posts.
I've finally taken the leap and gone digital (350D and Tamron
17-55/2. and very happy so far.

My question is: What is the difference, a setting on the 350D, between
AdobeRGB or sRGB? Is it only relevent to JPEGs or would it affect RAW
files as well?

Thanks

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
John McWilliams
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2006
bigfeet wrote:
> First of all, thank you to all those that helped with my earlier posts.
> I've finally taken the leap and gone digital (350D and Tamron
> 17-55/2. and very happy so far.
>
> My question is: What is the difference, a setting on the 350D, between
> AdobeRGB or sRGB? Is it only relevent to JPEGs or would it affect RAW
> files as well?


RAW files can be assigned any color space on conversion to JPEG, PSD or
TIFF files.

If you are using a local processor, you're probably better off with
sRGB, but if printing at home or using a custom lab, aRGB might be
better, as it has a larger gamut.

--
John McWilliams
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Randy Berbaum
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2006
bigfeet <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
: First of all, thank you to all those that helped with my earlier posts.
: I've finally taken the leap and gone digital (350D and Tamron
: 17-55/2. and very happy so far.

: My question is: What is the difference, a setting on the 350D, between
: AdobeRGB or sRGB? Is it only relevent to JPEGs or would it affect RAW
: files as well?

I am not 100% sure about your camera (no personal experience) but I
believe that raw bypasses the color space setting (sRGB/aRGB). Personally
I use aRGB when I am going to be loading this image into an adobe product
for editing and printing. But if you do not use adobe products for this,
you would be better off using sRGB as this is the standard useable by the
widest possible number of products. JMHO

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL

 
Reply With Quote
 
Derek Fountain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2006
> My question is: What is the difference, a setting on the 350D, between
> AdobeRGB or sRGB? Is it only relevent to JPEGs or would it affect RAW
> files as well?


The answer to the first part of your question gets very complicated very
quickly. The brief answer is that they're "colour spaces" that give
monitors, printers, etc., guidance on how the colours in the photograph
should be represented. Color space information is added after the RAW
data is processed into an image, so, no, they don't affect RAW.

sRGB is the "standard/default" colour space used in most
non-professional environments, and is the one that works best in the
very common scenario of "no colour space at all." Since you need to ask
the most basic question, you should put the setting on sRGB and leave it
there until you understand enough about the subject to know why you'd
want to change it.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Floyd L. Davidson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-14-2006
Derek Fountain <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> My question is: What is the difference, a setting on the 350D, between
>> AdobeRGB or sRGB? Is it only relevent to JPEGs or would it affect RAW
>> files as well?

>
>The answer to the first part of your question gets very
>complicated very quickly. The brief answer is that they're
>"colour spaces" that give monitors, printers, etc., guidance on
>how the colours in the photograph should be represented. Color
>space information is added after the RAW data is processed into
>an image, so, no, they don't affect RAW.
>
>sRGB is the "standard/default" colour space used in most
>non-professional environments, and is the one that works best in


sRGB is the standard for the Internet, professional as well as
non. If you want to post pictures on a web site, they should be
restricted to a sRGB color space.

>the very common scenario of "no colour space at all." Since you
>need to ask the most basic question, you should put the setting
>on sRGB and leave it there until you understand enough about the
>subject to know why you'd want to change it.


That is basically good advice. It is in particular true because
many printers, and print shops, use sRGB. For those that don't,
aRGB may or may not be appropriate either.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Derek Fountain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-15-2006
> sRGB is the standard for the Internet, professional as well as
> non.


In what way? I was unaware of any colour management standard being
applied to the Internet. Who decided on that standard, where is it
documented, and who is supposed to abide by it?
 
Reply With Quote
 
Floyd L. Davidson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-15-2006
Derek Fountain <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> sRGB is the standard for the Internet, professional as well as
>> non.

>
>In what way? I was unaware of any colour management standard
>being applied to the Internet. Who decided on that standard,
>where is it documented, and who is supposed to abide by it?


http://www.w3.org/Graphics/Color/sRGB
http://www.color.org/sRGB.html

"Hewlett-Packard and Microsoft propose the addition of
support for a standard color space, sRGB, within the
Microsoft operating systems, HP products, the Internet, and
all other interested vendors."
Version 1.10, November 5, 1996


http://www.srgb.com/basicsofsrgb.htm

"It has been standardized by the International
Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) as IEC 61966-2-1."

See every HTML specification since HTML 3.2 Reference
Specification dated January 14, 1997.

--
Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) (E-Mail Removed)
 
Reply With Quote
 
Derek Fountain
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-15-2006
> See every HTML specification since HTML 3.2 Reference
> Specification dated January 14, 1997.


Well I'm damned. The hours I've spent looking through the HTML spec over
the years, and I never spotted that.

Of course, the HP/Microsoft proposal is just that - a proposal, and a 10
year old one at that. CSS doesn't carry the 'rendering-intent' property
proposed, and there is no requirement for the use of colour management
in any Internet technology that I'm aware of. Browsers don't use colour
management anyway.

Interesting though. I consider myself educated. )
 
Reply With Quote
 
Paul Mitchum
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-15-2006
Derek Fountain <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > See every HTML specification since HTML 3.2 Reference
> > Specification dated January 14, 1997.

>
> Well I'm damned. The hours I've spent looking through the HTML spec over
> the years, and I never spotted that.
>
> Of course, the HP/Microsoft proposal is just that - a proposal, and a 10
> year old one at that. CSS doesn't carry the 'rendering-intent' property
> proposed, and there is no requirement for the use of colour management
> in any Internet technology that I'm aware of. Browsers don't use colour
> management anyway.
>
> Interesting though. I consider myself educated. )


Browsers *do* use colo[u]r management, just in different ways from
browser to browser. That's why sRGB is the safest bet, making it a
de-facto standard if not an official one.
 
Reply With Quote
 
tomm42
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      09-15-2006

bigfeet wrote:
> First of all, thank you to all those that helped with my earlier posts.
> I've finally taken the leap and gone digital (350D and Tamron
> 17-55/2. and very happy so far.
>
> My question is: What is the difference, a setting on the 350D, between
> AdobeRGB or sRGB? Is it only relevent to JPEGs or would it affect RAW
> files as well?
>
> Thanks


I would use Adobe RGB in the camera, if your pics are going only to the
internet use sRGB. If you feel you are going to print aRGB is a better
start. I found our local drugstore uses an aRGB model after a number of
pictures I sent them came back looking flat. At 19 cents a print, not a
crisis. Adobe RGB can always be converted to sRGB, but the other way
you still only have the truncated sRGB color.

Tom

 
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
If AdobeRGB is better, why does sRGB exist? Alfred Molon Digital Photography 10 07-08-2007 11:57 PM
Converting from AdobeRGB to SRGB Alfred Molon Digital Photography 8 05-16-2006 01:50 PM
sRGB or AdobeRGB Colour Space? Paul Digital Photography 5 11-08-2004 01:18 AM
Colorspace - AdobeRGB to sRGB conversion (ImageMagick?) Jim Garrison Digital Photography 1 09-30-2003 03:10 AM
Re: Colorspace - AdobeRGB to sRGB conversion (ImageMagick?) Jim Garrison Digital Photography 0 09-30-2003 02:58 AM



Advertisments