shot and edited with adobe rgb; now print with srgb?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by fanciman, May 10, 2005.

  1. fanciman

    fanciman Guest

    I shot and edited my photos using adobe rgb colour space. Now it is
    time to take them to the print shop.

    The ones i have tried can't use adobe rgb as the output. THe best i
    got was a guy saying he tried to configure it twice but couldn't as it
    was too complex.

    Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    The print shops say it won't...
     
    fanciman, May 10, 2005
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. fanciman

    Pete D Guest

    "fanciman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I shot and edited my photos using adobe rgb colour space. Now it is
    > time to take them to the print shop.
    >
    > The ones i have tried can't use adobe rgb as the output. THe best i
    > got was a guy saying he tried to configure it twice but couldn't as it
    > was too complex.
    >
    > Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    > The print shops say it won't...


    And they should know. In this case it will not make any difference.
     
    Pete D, May 10, 2005
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. fanciman

    Paul Furman Guest

    fanciman wrote:

    > I shot and edited my photos using adobe rgb colour space. Now it is
    > time to take them to the print shop.
    >
    > The ones i have tried can't use adobe rgb as the output. THe best i
    > got was a guy saying he tried to configure it twice but couldn't as it
    > was too complex.
    >
    > Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    > The print shops say it won't...



    If you have photoshop, it's easy to convert to another color space.
    Surely there are cheaper programs that will do this, though I don't know.

    --
    Paul Furman
    http://www.edgehill.net/1
    san francisco native plants
     
    Paul Furman, May 11, 2005
    #3
  4. fanciman

    Stacey Guest

    fanciman wrote:


    >
    > Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    > The print shops say it won't...



    It won't matter on many machines because the printer can't print colors much
    outside of sRGB anyway. I'm also finding out that my own inkjet prints made
    on a i9900 look MUCH better than what any of the labs I've tried can do and
    can use aRGB and even much of the proRGB colorspace.
    --

    Stacey
     
    Stacey, May 11, 2005
    #4
  5. fanciman

    Ryadia@Home Guest

    fanciman wrote:
    > I shot and edited my photos using adobe rgb colour space. Now it is
    > time to take them to the print shop.
    >
    > The ones i have tried can't use adobe rgb as the output. THe best i
    > got was a guy saying he tried to configure it twice but couldn't as it
    > was too complex.
    >
    > Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    > The print shops say it won't...

    --------------
    sRGB is supposed to represent the colour space of a television or video.
    Adobe RGB is supposed to be able to reduce the gamut (contrast range of
    colour) to what a commercial printing press can reproduce.

    In practice you may find sRGB for your camera settings and Adobe RGB for
    your Photoshop settings will result in very good results... Right up
    until you come across a Fuji Frontierer digital lab. These things work
    with sRGB and work better than many people give them credit for.

    Now just reflect on what I said and what Stacey said about her printer
    and you'll see the that using Adobe RGB for editing will compress the
    colour gamut (make good prints on an inkjet). To then convert that image
    to sRGB does not widen it again, just changes the way it is represented.

    If you intend to have lab prints from all your work, set your camera up
    for sRGB and edit in sRGB too. What you see on the screen is sRGB.
    Otherwise some of the colour which could be captured with your camera
    will be lost and some of the colour which could have been sent to the
    printer simply doesn't exist anymore.

    Douglas
     
    Ryadia@Home, May 11, 2005
    #5
  6. fanciman

    Sonrise Guest

    "Ryadia@Home" <> wrote in message
    news:4281cf7f$...
    > fanciman wrote:
    >> I shot and edited my photos using adobe rgb colour space. Now it is
    >> time to take them to the print shop.
    >>
    >> The ones i have tried can't use adobe rgb as the output. THe best i
    >> got was a guy saying he tried to configure it twice but couldn't as it
    >> was too complex.
    >>
    >> Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    >> The print shops say it won't...

    > --------------
    > sRGB is supposed to represent the colour space of a television or video.
    > Adobe RGB is supposed to be able to reduce the gamut (contrast range of
    > colour) to what a commercial printing press can reproduce.
    >
    > In practice you may find sRGB for your camera settings and Adobe RGB for
    > your Photoshop settings will result in very good results... Right up until
    > you come across a Fuji Frontierer digital lab. These things work with sRGB
    > and work better than many people give them credit for.
    >
    > Now just reflect on what I said and what Stacey said about her printer and
    > you'll see the that using Adobe RGB for editing will compress the colour
    > gamut (make good prints on an inkjet). To then convert that image to sRGB
    > does not widen it again, just changes the way it is represented.
    >
    > If you intend to have lab prints from all your work, set your camera up
    > for sRGB and edit in sRGB too. What you see on the screen is sRGB.
    > Otherwise some of the colour which could be captured with your camera will
    > be lost and some of the colour which could have been sent to the printer
    > simply doesn't exist anymore.
    >
    > Douglas


    Interesting comments, but what I've read recently indicates that sRGB has a
    more restricted color gamut than AdobeRGB, and that -when possible - your
    printer should be set to "same as source" to avoid conflicts with ICC
    profiles imbedded in the printer driver (at least for Epson printers.)
    Please bear with me. I'm still learning.). I have come across one commercial
    lab (which I may use in the near future) that recommends all digital files
    be edited and saved in sRGB. This lab uses - guess what - a Fuji Frontier.
    To quote their web site:

    "Always, without question, shoot, view, and save digital files in SRGB.
    SRGB is the common color space that photographic printers use. By using
    Abobe98 or another color space is setting you and your lab up for failure.
    Viewing and saving your digital files in a color space other than SRGB means
    that you are viewing and expecting a print back that cannot be made. Any Pro
    Lab using photographic paper receiving a color space other than SRGB will
    convert the file automatically to SRGB and you will receive a print that
    looks nothing like your monitor. So shooting, viewing, saving and finally
    printing in SRGB will get you the best results."

    My 20D allows me to choose between Adobe and sRGB when capturing images.
    Frankly, I can't tell that much difference (but my wife will tell you I have
    poor color discrimination.)

    I actually prefer inkjet prints because I have more control. But, anyone
    paying for photographs (weddings, etc.) will expect the prints to last
    several generations, and that means printing on conventional photo paper.
    This is the biggest qualm I have with inkjet prints. As far as I know, only
    Epson pigmented inks have decent lightfastness and longevity ratings.

    Sonrise
     
    Sonrise, May 11, 2005
    #6
  7. fanciman

    fanciman Guest

    Thank you for the comments so far everybody.

    I am a bit surprised and confused now.

    I deliberately set the camera and photoshop settings to shoot adobe
    RGB colour space because I heard that aRGB could handle a wider gamut.
    I also seem to remember seeing a colour graph of the sRGB and aRGB
    gamuts side by side. The adobe one was clearly wider, particularly in
    the blue/green area, iirc. I think that it must be true that aRGB is
    better than sRGB because why would adobe go ahead and develop such a
    thing if it were inferior?

    I trust what people are saying about it not making much of a
    difference, and the print shop i have in mind does use a fuji
    frontier.

    But from a theoretical point of view now i want to know what is the
    ideal way of shooting / editing / printing my shots. Maybe i would be
    best off getting an epson that can do it adobe RGB... i don't know.

    What do you think?
     
    fanciman, May 11, 2005
    #7
  8. fanciman

    Sonrise Guest

    "fanciman" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > Thank you for the comments so far everybody.
    >
    > I am a bit surprised and confused now.
    >
    > I deliberately set the camera and photoshop settings to shoot adobe
    > RGB colour space because I heard that aRGB could handle a wider gamut.
    > I also seem to remember seeing a colour graph of the sRGB and aRGB
    > gamuts side by side. The adobe one was clearly wider, particularly in
    > the blue/green area, iirc. I think that it must be true that aRGB is
    > better than sRGB because why would adobe go ahead and develop such a
    > thing if it were inferior?
    >
    > I trust what people are saying about it not making much of a
    > difference, and the print shop i have in mind does use a fuji
    > frontier.
    >
    > But from a theoretical point of view now i want to know what is the
    > ideal way of shooting / editing / printing my shots. Maybe i would be
    > best off getting an epson that can do it adobe RGB... i don't know.
    >
    > What do you think?


    Well, I'm in a similar quandry. I've been reading this book - "Mastering
    Digital Printing" by Harald Johnson, which I got through Amazon for $25.
    It's a couple years old, but full of a lot of good information on almost
    every digital printing proces. In reading posts to RPD I have come across
    links to various webpages that deal with digital workflow and specific
    printer profiles. BUT, they're all for EPSON printers! My HP 3820 does a
    passable job for a deskjet printer, but there is no way in the printer
    dialog to turn off the factory settings! Epson printer dialogs allow you to
    turn off the built-in ICC/printer profiles, and print straight from
    Photoshop/Elements using AdobeRGB gamut. Must be nice.

    Part of the problem with prints matching image edits/enhancements is related
    to monitor calibration. I have also had trouble getting my prints to match
    what's on the monitor. I think it would be easier with an Epson printer and
    aRGB, but I'm not sure. You might want to experiment with output to other
    standards. Elements lets me access Adobe 1998 and other profiles in the
    printing dialog by clicking Show More Options. There's about a dozen or so
    color spaces to choose from. Interestingly, the dialog indicates Elements is
    using Adobe 1998 color space.

    Sorry for ramblling, but I've decided to finish this book and then re-read
    it until I have a good grasp on the gamut business and aRGB vs sRGB vs Adobe
    1998. Man, is my head spinning!

    Sonrise
     
    Sonrise, May 12, 2005
    #8
  9. fanciman

    Paul Furman Guest

    The thing about color management is you have to get every step correct
    or it's screwed. It's not horribly difficult but requires some patience
    and attention to detail. My foray into the realm nose dived, what I get
    now is so-so, I'll get back into it when I get a better printer.
     
    Paul Furman, May 12, 2005
    #9
  10. fanciman

    Andrew Haley Guest

    Ryadia@Home <> wrote:
    > fanciman wrote:
    >> I shot and edited my photos using adobe rgb colour space. Now it is
    >> time to take them to the print shop.
    >>
    >> The ones i have tried can't use adobe rgb as the output. THe best i
    >> got was a guy saying he tried to configure it twice but couldn't as it
    >> was too complex.
    >>
    >> Should i just go ahead with srgb? Will it make much of a difference?
    >> The print shops say it won't...

    > --------------
    > sRGB is supposed to represent the colour space of a television or video.


    Yes. It's based on the HDTV primaries, and is close to what can be
    displayed on most monitors.

    > Adobe RGB is supposed to be able to reduce the gamut (contrast range of
    > colour) to what a commercial printing press can reproduce.


    Adobe RGB has the same red and blue primaries as sRGB, but the green
    is different. Adobe RGB has a considerably wider gamut than sRGB.

    Because of this different green primary, Adobe RGB cannot be displayed
    on most monitors. AFAIK there is no printing technology that can
    print the entire Adobe RGB space, at least for reflective prints. So,
    it is necessary to render images to a smaller space when printing.
    Ideally, this will be a custom space for the printing process being
    used.

    sRGB is a reasonably close match to some printing technologies, but
    there are large areas of the sRGB gamut that cannot be printed either.

    > In practice you may find sRGB for your camera settings and Adobe RGB for
    > your Photoshop settings will result in very good results...


    This is exactly the wrong way round. If you shoot in sRGB -- the
    smaller colour space -- colour information is lost at the point of
    shooting. Better to shoot in the wider colour space and then convert
    later.

    > Right up until you come across a Fuji Frontierer digital lab. These
    > things work with sRGB and work better than many people give them
    > credit for.


    > Now just reflect on what I said and what Stacey said about her printer
    > and you'll see the that using Adobe RGB for editing will compress the
    > colour gamut


    No it won't. Plenty of people use Adobe RGB as a working space in
    order to give themselves a little more room when adjusting colour.

    > (make good prints on an inkjet).


    > To then convert that image to sRGB does not widen it again, just
    > changes the way it is represented.


    Andrew.
     
    Andrew Haley, May 27, 2005
    #10
    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. Israel Rodriguez

    Canon 20D - sRGB Vs Adobe RGB - Which Is Better

    Israel Rodriguez, Dec 25, 2004, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    907
  2. Stealth
    Replies:
    22
    Views:
    3,506
    Stealth
    Mar 30, 2005
  3. Russell

    Adobe RGB V sRGB

    Russell, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    59
    Views:
    1,456
    Hecate
    Sep 26, 2005
  4. Guest

    Newbie Question: Adobe RGB and sRGB

    Guest, Aug 26, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    10
    Views:
    515
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Aug 30, 2005
  5. Dave Addison

    sRGB versus Adobe RGB

    Dave Addison, Nov 24, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    24
    Views:
    4,188
    Bill Hilton
    Nov 28, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page