Adobe Photoshop: my way

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by n, Nov 25, 2003.

  1. n

    n Guest

    I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.

    I will take photos in raw mode.
    Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)

    Then I do the following:
    Auto levels
    Auto colours
    Auto contrast

    Should that be it?

    It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.
    n, Nov 25, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. n

    Ray Murphy Guest

    ----------
    In article <>,
    (n) wrote:


    >I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    >
    >I will take photos in raw mode.
    >Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    >I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    >(Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)
    >
    >Then I do the following:
    >Auto levels
    >Auto colours
    >Auto contrast
    >
    >Should that be it?
    >
    >It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.


    RM: That's a big question you've asked, but let's say you wanted to
    provide one of your pictures to a publisher or printer, then the above
    processing of the original image would (in almost all cases) be
    absolutely useless and they would need to fixed up before any films or
    printing plates were made.

    You would also need to ensure, in the case of professional printing,
    that you had enough pixels to allow for good reproduction of your
    image. You need 2 pixels for every halftone dot. This means that for
    high quality printing on art paper you would need to provide a minumim
    of 266 pixels per inch for a 133 line screen, or 300 pixels per inch
    for a 150 line screen.

    I'd say from my experience that the vast majority people who deal with
    digital images are unaware of this requirement and think that if they
    can get a beautiful print on a desktop inkjet or laser printer, that
    the image will print very well on a printing machine.
    That's not the case at all unless you have that abovementioned ratio
    (or something close to it).

    Ray
    Ray Murphy, Nov 25, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. n

    Chris Brown Guest

    In article <>,
    n <> wrote:
    >
    >Then I do the following:
    >Auto levels
    >Auto colours
    >Auto contrast


    If you read the online help, or the printed manual, you'll see that these
    three functions all do slightly different versions of the same thing.
    There's not a huge point to doing more than one of them...
    Chris Brown, Nov 25, 2003
    #3
  4. n

    Mark Herring Guest

    On 25 Nov 2003 00:22:55 -0800, (n) wrote:

    >I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    >
    >I will take photos in raw mode.
    >Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    >I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    >(Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)
    >
    >Then I do the following:
    >Auto levels
    >Auto colours
    >Auto contrast
    >
    >Should that be it?
    >
    >It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.


    Personal opinion: I would not do ANYTHING automatic when processing
    pictures.

    Photoshop has more tools than I will EVER use.....Here are a few that
    I use regularly:

    Levels---I usually just work with the histogram--make sure thater is a
    full range of tones---totally personal taste

    color balance---you can control highlights , shadows and midtones
    separately---lots of ways

    Un-sharp masking

    Cropping---I have never seen a picture that would not benefit from
    slight cropping (I do any resampling at this step---I usually try to
    avoid resampling more than once)

    dust spotting

    removal of superfluous objects

    fixing red-eye

    Adding text

    and more...........I have found that I learn best by simple trial and
    error
    **************************
    Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    Mark Herring, Nov 25, 2003
    #4
  5. n

    Bob Hatch Guest

    "n" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    >
    > I will take photos in raw mode.
    > Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)
    >
    > Then I do the following:
    > Auto levels
    > Auto colours
    > Auto contrast
    >
    > Should that be it?
    >
    > It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.


    What is the primary end use of your images?

    You are doing way too much "auto".


    --
    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power
    is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be
    at all times armed." --Thomas Jefferson
    http://www.bobhatch.com
    Bob Hatch, Nov 25, 2003
    #5
  6. n

    Todd Walker Guest

    In article <>,
    says...
    > I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    >
    > I will take photos in raw mode.
    > Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)


    The color space out of your camera and the color space in PS should
    match. There is no point in shooting Adobe RGB in the camera if you are
    going to use sRGB in processing.

    > Then I do the following:
    > Auto levels


    BAD

    > Auto colours


    BAD

    > Auto contrast


    Usually OK. Auto levels and auto colors are both useless tools that will
    destroy the quality of your images. Auto contrast usually works OK
    though.

    > Should that be it?


    You are allowing Photoshop to decide what your final output will look
    like which is a very bad idea.

    > It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.


    My personal PS workflow:

    * Levels -- look at the histgram and bring the outside two arrows in to
    where the histogram begins. Use the middle arrow to control brightness

    * Contrast -- adjust the contrast slider until I'm happy.

    * Saturation -- increase saturation if necessary

    * Crop -- if necessary

    * Sharpening -- using Fred Miranda's Intellisharpen action

    * Save as JPG if for the web, TIFF if for printing.

    --
    __________________________________
    Todd Walker
    http://www.toddwalker.net
    Canon 10D page:
    http://www.toddwalker.net/canon10d
    __________________________________
    Todd Walker, Nov 25, 2003
    #6
  7. n

    Don Coon Guest

    "Mark Herring" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On 25 Nov 2003 00:22:55 -0800, (n) wrote:
    >

    SNIP

    > Personal opinion: I would not do ANYTHING automatic when processing
    > pictures.


    A BIG "AMEM!" Auto Levels works 50% of the time at best but usually results
    in messed up color balance. The manual Levels tool is quick and accurate;
    while in RGB, just slide the left and right in until you reach the edge of
    the histogram data. Hold the Alt key down to see what you're clipping if you
    go further. Often you're not losing anything important.

    Agree with everything else with one comment. Don't over-sharpen. My standard
    is 200%, .3, 0 although I know at times more sharpening is needed but err
    on the side of too little.

    >
    > Photoshop has more tools than I will EVER use.....Here are a few that
    > I use regularly:
    >
    > Levels---I usually just work with the histogram--make sure thater is a
    > full range of tones---totally personal taste
    >
    > color balance---you can control highlights , shadows and midtones
    > separately---lots of ways
    >
    > Un-sharp masking
    >
    > Cropping---I have never seen a picture that would not benefit from
    > slight cropping (I do any resampling at this step---I usually try to
    > avoid resampling more than once)
    >
    > dust spotting
    >
    > removal of superfluous objects
    >
    > fixing red-eye
    >
    > Adding text
    >
    > and more...........I have found that I learn best by simple trial and
    > error
    > **************************
    > Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    >
    Don Coon, Nov 25, 2003
    #7
  8. (n) writes:

    > I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    >
    > I will take photos in raw mode.
    > Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)


    That's a serious problem. Reconfigure photoshop to assume Adobe RGB
    on untagged images. Otherwise you're seriously damaging your colors
    by applying the wrong profile.

    > Then I do the following:
    > Auto levels
    > Auto colours
    > Auto contrast
    >
    > Should that be it?


    I don't find the auto functions much use. And levels and contrast are
    handling mostly the same things.

    My flow is more like do curves, including picking a mid-grey if
    possible to get most of the color balance right, then do retouching,
    then start doing masking and local curves adjustment for exhibition
    prints / difficult pictures.
    --
    David Dyer-Bennet, <>, <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/>
    RKBA: <noguns-nomoney.com> <www.dd-b.net/carry/>
    Photos: <dd-b.lighthunters.net> Snapshots: <www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/>
    Dragaera/Steven Brust: <dragaera.info/>
    David Dyer-Bennet, Nov 25, 2003
    #8
  9. (n) writes:

    >Then I do the following:
    >Auto levels
    >Auto colours
    >Auto contrast


    I find that I *never* use one of these functions in Photoshop without
    immediately following it with "undo". They're probably fine for taking
    an arbitrary image that came from some random place and "enhancing" it
    so you can see more highlight and shadow detail - but the result ends up
    looking unrealistic, or it has clipped highlights, or just doesn't look
    like the original scene.

    I often use Levels to manually adjust the portion of the scene contrast
    range that I care about to the available 0-255 range. That's a
    right-slider adjustment. I occasionally adjust the left slider to
    subtract some atmospheric haze. I sometimes adjust the 3 colours
    separately to do some colour balancing. And very occasionally I'll move
    the middle slider to adjust gamma.

    Dave
    Dave Martindale, Nov 25, 2003
    #9
  10. n

    Mark Johnson Guest

    (n) wrote:

    >I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.


    >I will take photos in raw mode.
    >Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    >I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    >(Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)


    >Then I do the following:
    >Auto levels
    >Auto colours
    >Auto contrast


    >Should that be it?


    >It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.


    You have, as others have mentioned, the common adjustments - selective
    selection, levels, unsharp, hue/sat/lightness, brightness/contrast,
    etc.

    As for print, you might want to just enlarge to 400-500%. That might
    give you an idea. If you clearly see blocks and steps, then that's
    what you'll barely see in a large print. If you carefully blur those,
    without affected the surrounding area, and taking care to note what
    edge or feature shape you want to maintain, you can get a better
    print. Or if you'd rather not rely on the print device's interpolation
    - whatever print shop you send it to - then crop to the desired aspect
    ratio that works, if not the scale, be careful about that blockiness,
    and once you have that reduced to your satisfaction, enlarge by 2 at
    300 dpi, so that in inches, you have the actual, or slightly larger,
    print size. If you enlarge passed 2, you might have to go in and
    smooth those edges, again. And at that point, it could be every edge
    in the photo - which could take hours, to say the least.

    You have the 'gamut check' to see how the color might print out. But
    since the color is so dependent on the paper, that's something you
    almost have to see with your eye, and even then in the proscribed
    lighting, and at even the proscribed angle.
    Mark Johnson, Nov 25, 2003
    #10
  11. n

    n Guest

    "Ray Murphy" <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > ----------
    > In article <>,
    > (n) wrote:
    >
    >
    > >I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    > >
    > >I will take photos in raw mode.
    > >Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > >I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > >(Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)
    > >
    > >Then I do the following:
    > >Auto levels
    > >Auto colours
    > >Auto contrast
    > >
    > >Should that be it?
    > >
    > >It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.

    >
    > RM: That's a big question you've asked, but let's say you wanted to
    > provide one of your pictures to a publisher or printer, then the above
    > processing of the original image would (in almost all cases) be
    > absolutely useless and they would need to fixed up before any films or
    > printing plates were made.
    >
    > You would also need to ensure, in the case of professional printing,
    > that you had enough pixels to allow for good reproduction of your
    > image. You need 2 pixels for every halftone dot. This means that for
    > high quality printing on art paper you would need to provide a minumim
    > of 266 pixels per inch for a 133 line screen, or 300 pixels per inch
    > for a 150 line screen.
    >

    The maximum resolution i can see on a Canon D10 is 3072x2048, whcih
    would mean that if i did a 150 line screen (I actually don't know what
    one of those is!) I could aim to get 10"x6" prints. But I don't know
    how photoshop would effect this as afaiu it isn't going to reduce the
    resolution. But going to a different resolution on the camera, to for
    example save space in memory, that would reduce the pixels...


    > I'd say from my experience that the vast majority people who deal with
    > digital images are unaware of this requirement and think that if they
    > can get a beautiful print on a desktop inkjet or laser printer, that
    > the image will print very well on a printing machine.
    > That's not the case at all unless you have that abovementioned ratio
    > (or something close to it).
    >
    > Ray
    n, Nov 26, 2003
    #11
  12. n

    n Guest

    "Don Coon" <coondw_nospam@hotmail_dot_.com> wrote in message news:<HtMwb.300496$HS4.2693781@attbi_s01>...
    > "Mark Herring" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > On 25 Nov 2003 00:22:55 -0800, (n) wrote:
    > >

    > SNIP
    >
    > > Personal opinion: I would not do ANYTHING automatic when processing
    > > pictures.

    >
    > A BIG "AMEM!" Auto Levels works 50% of the time at best but usually results
    > in messed up color balance. The manual Levels tool is quick and accurate;
    > while in RGB, just slide the left and right in until you reach the edge of
    > the histogram data. Hold the Alt key down to see what you're clipping if you
    > go further. Often you're not losing anything important.
    >
    > Agree with everything else with one comment. Don't over-sharpen. My standard
    > is 200%, .3, 0 although I know at times more sharpening is needed but err
    > on the side of too little.


    Am I right in thinking that 'sharpen' and 'un-sharp masking' are the
    same thing? iiuc, I set the parameters for sharpenining in the unsharp
    mask area and then I implement an increment of that sharpening by
    clicking on sharpen. Then I can implement another sharpening by
    clicking on sharpen again...


    >
    > >
    > > Photoshop has more tools than I will EVER use.....Here are a few that
    > > I use regularly:
    > >
    > > Levels---I usually just work with the histogram--make sure thater is a
    > > full range of tones---totally personal taste
    > >
    > > color balance---you can control highlights , shadows and midtones
    > > separately---lots of ways
    > >
    > > Un-sharp masking
    > >
    > > Cropping---I have never seen a picture that would not benefit from
    > > slight cropping (I do any resampling at this step---I usually try to
    > > avoid resampling more than once)
    > >
    > > dust spotting
    > >
    > > removal of superfluous objects
    > >
    > > fixing red-eye
    > >
    > > Adding text
    > >
    > > and more...........I have found that I learn best by simple trial and
    > > error
    > > **************************
    > > Mark Herring, Pasadena, Calif.
    > > Private e-mail: Just say no to "No".
    > >
    n, Nov 26, 2003
    #12
  13. n

    n Guest

    "Bob Hatch" <> wrote in message news:<bpvt2d$1ti59c$-berlin.de>...
    > "n" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    > >
    > > I will take photos in raw mode.
    > > Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > > I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > > (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)
    > >
    > > Then I do the following:
    > > Auto levels
    > > Auto colours
    > > Auto contrast
    > >
    > > Should that be it?
    > >
    > > It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to do.

    >
    > What is the primary end use of your images?
    >
    > You are doing way too much "auto".


    Well, most of my pictures are rubbish and I am just taking them to
    learn how the camera settings work at the moment. With pictures that I
    have taken that I like I would make them into 8x10 prints. (Henceforth
    6"x10") I would love to get one of those gorgeous Epson photo printers
    to make the prints too. At the moment I am sending them to a shop.
    n, Nov 26, 2003
    #13
  14. n

    Bob Hatch Guest

    "n" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Am I right in thinking that 'sharpen' and 'un-sharp masking' are the
    > same thing? iiuc, I set the parameters for sharpenining in the unsharp
    > mask area and then I implement an increment of that sharpening by
    > clicking on sharpen. Then I can implement another sharpening by
    > clicking on sharpen again...
    >
    >

    No, you are wrong. Most folks who use PS use unsharp mask, not sharpen. You
    really need to get a book on PS and run through the tutorials. Based on what
    you have posted so far your PS knowledge appears to be at the starting edge
    of beginner. PS is a very powerful program and you can really do a lot with
    your images, but you'll have to spend *hours* learning the program.

    --
    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power
    is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be
    at all times armed." --Thomas Jefferson
    http://www.bobhatch.com
    Bob Hatch, Nov 26, 2003
    #14
  15. n

    Bob Hatch Guest

    "n" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >
    > Well, most of my pictures are rubbish and I am just taking them to
    > learn how the camera settings work at the moment. With pictures that I
    > have taken that I like I would make them into 8x10 prints. (Henceforth
    > 6"x10") I would love to get one of those gorgeous Epson photo printers
    > to make the prints too. At the moment I am sending them to a shop.


    With your camera and a basic working knowledge of PS you should be able to
    get 11x14 prints and larger from the 10D by using bicubic interpolation.

    You need to learn how to use the camera and do Manual White Balance. This
    will save *a lot* of time on the computer. Next thing is to learn to use
    adjustment layers focusing on the Layers Adjustment, Curves, with *very
    limited* use of Brightness and Contrast.

    I see in the earlier thread that you found out how to set the camera to not
    use Adobe RGB and that will help in your color management. I say again, get
    a good book on PS and study and work with it. Two I would recommend are:
    Photoshop 7 Classroom in a Book &
    Photoshop for Photographers

    Now, regardless of what you read in these books, unless you are using the
    bulk of your images for press type printing, books, magazines, brochures etc
    stay away from Adobe RGB in PS.

    --
    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power
    is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be
    at all times armed." --Thomas Jefferson
    http://www.bobhatch.com
    Bob Hatch, Nov 26, 2003
    #15
  16. n

    Don Coon Guest

    "n" <> wrote in message
    news:...

    SNIP

    > Am I right in thinking that 'sharpen' and 'un-sharp masking' are the
    > same thing? iiuc, I set the parameters for sharpenining in the unsharp
    > mask area and then I implement an increment of that sharpening by
    > clicking on sharpen. Then I can implement another sharpening by
    > clicking on sharpen again...


    Not really. You can control Unsharp Mask (USM) but not Sharpen. I'm not
    really sure what parameters the "Sharpen" menu command uses but I never use
    it -- probably for that reason : ) And I'm not going to spend much time
    trying to determine the parameters.

    I only use "Sharpen Edges" and "Unsharp Mask" except for a set of
    UltraSharpen Pro tools I purchased.

    Sharpen Edges looks for edges and sharpens them although you have no control
    of the tool.

    USM is THE primary sharpening tool because you control the parameters and
    can see the results in the preview screen and, if selected, on the full
    screen. I don't know why you'd apply multiple doses of USM since you can
    fully control USM in a single application.

    Having said that, I do actually apply multiple doses but only because I
    apply it to selected areas. For example, I always use the lasso tool to
    select eyes and apply a fairly liberal dose of USM to bring out some
    brillance. For "things" such as clothing, trees, grass, etc. I generally
    apply my standard 200%, .3 radius, 0 threshold setting. For skin I use
    extreme care not to accentuate wrinkles and may even apply a mild blur. For
    hair I'm careful not to make it look artificial by oversharpening.

    To reduce haze in landscape shots, I apply 30% to 70%, 20 radius and 4
    threshold.

    The single overriding rule I follow is NOT to oversharpen. If people can see
    the effects of the sharpening, you've overdone it.

    I've yet to see any consistent rules of thumb for sharpening so you really
    have to explore it on your own and test techniques you discover here and
    there.

    Clear as mud, huh? Maybe we need to sharpen the procedures ; )
    Don Coon, Nov 26, 2003
    #16
  17. n

    MikeWhy Guest

    "n" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "Bob Hatch" <> wrote in message

    news:<bpvt2d$1ti59c$-berlin.de>...
    > > "n" <> wrote in message
    > > news:...
    > > > I think i am not making proper use of the facilities.
    > > >
    > > > I will take photos in raw mode.


    Maybe consider putting that off till later. Not a big deal either way...
    maybe it's OK to get that in your workflow early.

    > > > Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > > > I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > > > (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)


    AdodeRGB has a wider gamut (more colors in all lightness ranges). Also,
    converting modes and spaces is lossy. So, you lose on both ends by
    converting down to sRGB. You might as well keep it in AdobeRGB until you
    convert down to send to the print shop.

    > > >
    > > > Then I do the following:
    > > > Auto levels
    > > > Auto colours
    > > > Auto contrast
    > > >
    > > > Should that be it?


    USM, usually.

    > > > It is very simple but I would like to hear about some other things to

    do.
    > >
    > > What is the primary end use of your images?
    > >
    > > You are doing way too much "auto".

    >
    > Well, most of my pictures are rubbish and I am just taking them to
    > learn how the camera settings work at the moment. With pictures that I
    > have taken that I like I would make them into 8x10 prints. (Henceforth
    > 6"x10") I would love to get one of those gorgeous Epson photo printers
    > to make the prints too. At the moment I am sending them to a shop.


    Instead of auto-levels+colors+contrast, just make a levels adjustment layer
    and click options. The three radio buttons correspond to each of the three
    auto modes. Pick one; this is precisely the same as using one of the auto-
    adjustments. Set the threshold percentages much lower; mine default to
    0.01%. Uncheck the midtones box if you don't like the color cast, or use the
    mitones eyedropper to correct it.
    MikeWhy, Nov 26, 2003
    #17
  18. In article <>,
    n says...

    > I will take photos in raw mode.
    > Parameters will be adobe RGB.
    > I download and open the photo in Photoshop.
    > (Photoshop has the colour workspace sRGB.)
    >
    > Then I do the following:
    > Auto levels
    > Auto colours
    > Auto contrast
    >
    > Should that be it?


    Wouldn't it be easier to simply delete the
    files instead of going to so much trouble
    trying to destroy any useful data in them?

    --
    Michael Quack <>

    http://www.photoquack.de/glamour/1.htm
    http://www.photoquack.de/fashion/1.htm
    Michael Quack, Nov 26, 2003
    #18
  19. n

    Bob Hatch Guest

    "MikeWhy" <> wrote in message
    news:IqXwb.22369$...
    >
    > AdodeRGB has a wider gamut (more colors in all lightness ranges). Also,
    > converting modes and spaces is lossy. So, you lose on both ends by
    > converting down to sRGB. You might as well keep it in AdobeRGB until you
    > convert down to send to the print shop.
    >

    n, it is this kind of advice regarding Adobe RGB that you should run from
    like your pants are on fire. For your uses, if you take this advice, your
    image colors will flatten out when you covert to sRGB or send it to a lab
    for printing.

    Take a look at this site for "accurate" information on sRBG vs Adobe RGB.
    http://makeashorterlink.com/?C3C3226A6

    The missing question, and first part of the answer are:
    : IF ADOBE RGB IS SUPPOSED TO BE BETTER THAN sRGB - How come my colors
    look so awful when I set my camera to AdobeRGB?
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ----

    A: BECAUSE MOST COLOR PRINTERS ARE sRGB DEVICES. The technical reason is
    that AdobeRGB is a wider color gamut than the printer can deliver. Most
    printers, including (the prolific Fuji Frontier) are sRGB devices.
    Therefore, going from a wider gamut to a narrow output devices cuts off all
    of the saturated areas of color, especially greens...

    --
    "The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power
    is inherent in the people; ...that it is their right and duty to be
    at all times armed." --Thomas Jefferson
    http://www.bobhatch.com
    Bob Hatch, Nov 26, 2003
    #19
  20. n

    Bill Hilton Guest

    >From: "Bob Hatch"

    >Take a look at this site for "accurate" information on sRBG vs Adobe RGB.


    >Q: IF ADOBE RGB IS SUPPOSED TO BE BETTER THAN sRGB - How
    >come my colors look so awful when I set my camera to AdobeRGB?
    >
    >A: BECAUSE MOST COLOR PRINTERS ARE sRGB DEVICES.


    This is just plain silly, whoever wrote it doesn't know much about printers.

    sRGB is just an abstract grey-balanced color space, chosen to represent the
    average color gamut of uncalibrated monitors. There are NO printers that are
    "sRGB devices".

    >Most printers, including (the prolific Fuji Frontier) are sRGB devices.


    No they are not. Most of them are CMYK devices (the colors of the inks), some
    are CcMmYK devices (like the popular 6 color Epson and Canon desktop inkjets)
    and some are even CcMmYKk (like the Epson 2200, with 7 colors). You are
    confused because most of these printers accept a file in RGB mode and then
    convert it to CMYK (or whatever) for actual printing but there are dozens of
    possible RGB color spaces to work from.

    sRGB was chosen by Fuji and a couple of other printers as their *preferred* RGB
    input file working space simply because most of the files given to them are
    jpegs from digital cameras from users who don't know any better, but to say
    they are "sRGB devices" is ridiculous.

    To answer the original question, you can use either sRGB or AdobeRGB as your
    working space (or others, for that matter ... I often use a wide gamut space
    like Joe Holmes' Ektaspace with highly saturated film scans). If you are
    working on files mainly for the web then sRGB is fine (especially if they came
    from a digital camera to start with), or if your target is prints at Wal-Mart
    or similar or the on-line printers then sRGB is fine.

    If you have your sights set a bit higher and want to keep more of the colors
    captured by your camera you can work in AdobeRGB, which is preferred for
    outputting to better printers like the LightJet 5000 (which actually IS an RGB
    device since the exposure is done with lasers using these colors) or the better
    desktop printers like the Epsons and Canons, which convert the RGB data to the
    right CcMmYK values.

    If you work in AdobeRGB and need to create a jpeg for the web or print at
    Wal-Mart or similar you should convert to sRGB in Photoshop before sending the
    file out (Image > Mode > Convert to Profile) ... this is what I do with my
    jpegs. If you don't convert first the saturated colors get clipped. Working
    this way lets you keep the wider range of colors for the printers that can
    handle them while still being able to dumb-down the colors for the web or the
    printers mentioned earlier.

    Bill
    Bill Hilton, Nov 26, 2003
    #20
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Neil
    Replies:
    174
    Views:
    3,213
    Briscobar
    Apr 17, 2006
  2. Fuzzy Logic

    adobe photoshop 7.0 vs photoshop cs

    Fuzzy Logic, Dec 23, 2004, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,803
  3. Kenneth Maultsby

    Adobe Photoshop Eletments or Regular Photoshop

    Kenneth Maultsby, Jun 21, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    713
    Kenneth Maultsby
    Jun 22, 2004
  4. sharjo23
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    3,508
  5. John John

    AMD Opteron: 1-way, 2-way, ... Up to 8-way.

    John John, Dec 24, 2005, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    12
    Views:
    764
    Tony Sperling
    Dec 27, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page