theis "embedded adobe rgb" thing,,,,,,

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by bruin70@mail.com, Aug 28, 2006.

  1. Guest

    "embedded adobe rgb"

    who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    "good eye and color sense" anyway.

    so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    what i want?
     
    , Aug 28, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Vladislav Guest

    a color reproduction in your brain is:

    a number of photons * spectral sensetivity of your eyes

    a spectral sensetivity is different for 40 times for a 1000 persons in
    test.

    a number of photons:

    1. reflection light = a number of photons from radiation light * coeff
    of spectral reflection (paper and etc)
    2. radiation light = a number of photons

    A color gamut is a all color visible to your eyes from the device. A
    gamut is limited by some math coordinates. All devices have a different
    gamut. That is impossible to reproduce exactly gamut of device by using
    another device. Adobe color gamut just little more in comparison with
    sRGB gamut. A printer gamut can be more different from both.

    http://www.terekhoff.com
     
    Vladislav, Aug 28, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. wrote:
    : "embedded adobe rgb"

    : who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    : i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    : gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    : i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    : they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    : "good eye and color sense" anyway.

    : so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    : quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    : what i want?

    The way I understand it, Adobe has taken the standard RGB and enhanced the
    standard. This was originally intended to be internal to their photo
    editing products. But some camera manufacturers realized that if their
    product would take advantage of that same format for better use with a
    major maker of high end photo editing they would have an advantage, at
    least until everyone did the same. :) As far as I can tell the aRGB format
    only works from the camera thru the adobe product. But since most printers
    do not have the ability to fully use the standard RGB format, they have no
    reason to include aRGB in their internal software. So aRGB has very little
    to do with the printing of your image.

    As to making a printer more "faithful" to what you want, this is a
    problem. Most home sized printers simply do not have the ability to
    accurately reproduce more than about half the colors available to the
    standard RGB format, if that many. There will always be some degree of
    variation between a monitor display and a print as there is always the
    problem of reflective vs additive color (light being colored by light
    bouncing off a surface vs light being colored by filters in the path of
    the light). Converting from one to the other is never completely exact.
    And if you have not calibrated your monitor and printer with a good
    calibrating device the variation between the two may be much larger.

    So aRGB will help effect the image from your camera to your adobe editing
    software and through the editing process. But will likely do little or
    nothing for your print process. At least this is how I understand it.
    others here may have more specific knowledge to help you.

    Randy

    ==========
    Randy Berbaum
    Champaign, IL
     
    Randy Berbaum, Aug 28, 2006
    #3
  4. frederick Guest

    wrote:
    > "embedded adobe rgb"
    >
    > who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    > i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    > gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    > i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    > they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    > "good eye and color sense" anyway.
    >
    > so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    > quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    > what i want?
    >

    No - it probably doesn't guarantee anything.
    If the printer is using a wet-process lab like a Fuji Frontier, there is
    very little (only saturated yellow) that is possible from the printer
    but outside sRGB colourspace yet inside aRGB colour space, so there is
    little to gain just from aRGB (unless you specialise in photos of
    daffodils?)
    As well as working in the same colourspace, then also you would need to
    edit and soft-proof with their printer profile embedded. This requires
    you to get everything right (monitor profile and your workflow) and for
    them to get things right (their profiles accurate, consistent
    operation/operators, fresh chemicals etc - you have to trust them)

    If you want to nail colour in your prints, then print your own on a
    higher end photo inkjet. Unfortunately, that does open up several
    other cans of worms...
     
    frederick, Aug 28, 2006
    #4
  5. <> wrote in message
    news:...
    SNIP
    > so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything?


    It is a colorspace that allows to render saturated colors more
    accurately, especially intended for process printing but useful with
    other printing technologies as well.

    > does it help me to quantify what i want?


    Not by itself.

    > does it help the printer to be more faithful to what i want?


    That depends on your combined skills in colormanagement.

    --
    Bart
     
    Bart van der Wolf, Aug 28, 2006
    #5
  6. Roy G Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "embedded adobe rgb"
    >
    > who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    > i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    > gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    > i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    > they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    > "good eye and color sense" anyway.
    >
    > so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    > quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    > what i want?



    This thread has so far been very informative about the existance of so many
    crackpot ideas relating to colour management.

    Adobe RGB is a Working Space Profile, it is one of many, and is supposed to
    have a colour Gamut similar to Inkjet Printers. sRGB is another Working
    Space Profile and is similar to the gamut of a Monitor.

    These Profiles are only part of Colour Management, and Device Profiles are
    also needed before any proper Colour Managed Workflow can be set up.

    Have a read at your Editing Program Help Files for Colour Management or ICC
    Profiles. If you can not find much info then that Program will not be able
    to use C.M.

    If you do not have a Colour Managed Workflow in place, then tagging Adobe
    RGB or sRGB or any other RGB onto your images is of no use whatsoever.

    Your Photo Lab will probably have a C. M. Workflow, and most of them use
    sRGB as their Workspace, simply because most of their work comes from P & S
    camera users, and most of those cameras only have sRGB.

    Roy G
     
    Roy G, Aug 28, 2006
    #6
  7. Joan Guest

    Roy, can you give us the next chapter? The one that explains what
    happens if we send Adobe RGB files to a mini lab.

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    "Roy G" <> wrote in message
    news:9eBIg.24830$...
    : <> wrote in message
    : news:...
    : > "embedded adobe rgb"
    : >
    : > who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one
    thing
    : > i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no
    one
    : > gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey
    scale.
    : > i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i
    liked.
    : > they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with
    a
    : > "good eye and color sense" anyway.
    : >
    : > so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me
    to
    : > quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful
    to
    : > what i want?
    :
    :
    : This thread has so far been very informative about the existance of
    so many
    : crackpot ideas relating to colour management.
    :
    : Adobe RGB is a Working Space Profile, it is one of many, and is
    supposed to
    : have a colour Gamut similar to Inkjet Printers. sRGB is another
    Working
    : Space Profile and is similar to the gamut of a Monitor.
    :
    : These Profiles are only part of Colour Management, and Device
    Profiles are
    : also needed before any proper Colour Managed Workflow can be set up.
    :
    : Have a read at your Editing Program Help Files for Colour Management
    or ICC
    : Profiles. If you can not find much info then that Program will not
    be able
    : to use C.M.
    :
    : If you do not have a Colour Managed Workflow in place, then tagging
    Adobe
    : RGB or sRGB or any other RGB onto your images is of no use
    whatsoever.
    :
    : Your Photo Lab will probably have a C. M. Workflow, and most of them
    use
    : sRGB as their Workspace, simply because most of their work comes
    from P & S
    : camera users, and most of those cameras only have sRGB.
    :
    : Roy G
    :
    :
     
    Joan, Aug 28, 2006
    #7
  8. Bill Hilton Guest

    >Joan wrote:
    > Roy, can you give us the next chapter? The one that explains what
    > happens if we send Adobe RGB files to a mini lab.


    I'm not Roy but here's what's going on ... the same color will have
    lower RGB values in a wider gamut working space than in a lower gamut
    space so if you print or display it ignoring the working space info
    then saturated colors look duller.

    To see this in action look at these three links (below) ... I took a
    RAW file image of a red bird and converted it three times, once in sRGB
    (smaller gamut), then AdobeRGB (mid-sized gamut), finally in ProPhoto
    (all visible light, so extremely wide gamut). The color "red" was
    approximately rendered as follows (R/G/B values) ...

    srgb 200/77/39
    adobe rgb 158/53/0
    prophoto rgb 144/86/46

    In Photoshop or any other program that recognizes the profiles these
    all look pretty similar, but you can see what happens when you ignore
    the profiles by looking at the images in a non-color managed
    application like your web browser ... these three have been converted
    to jpegs without converting to sRGB first and you can see how dull the
    reds are in the prophoto rgb example ...

    http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/hilton_prophoto.jpg
    http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/hilton_adobergb.jpg
    http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/hilton_srgb.jpg

    If you download these and open in Photoshop and assign the correct
    working space to each of them you'll see that they suddenly look alike
    again. In other words "144/86/46" looks bright red when the program
    knows it's ProPhoto working space but dull red when the program ignores
    the working space info.

    So to answer your question "what happens if we send Adobe RGB files to
    a mini lab" look at the difference on your web browser between the sRGB
    and AdobeRGB versions and note how the saturated colors look duller.
    The fewer saturated colors you have the less you'll notice the
    differences.

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Aug 28, 2006
    #8
  9. Roy G wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    >
    >>"embedded adobe rgb"
    >>
    >>who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    >>i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    >>gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    >>i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    >>they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    >>"good eye and color sense" anyway.
    >>
    >>so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    >>quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    >>what i want?

    >
    > This thread has so far been very informative about the existance of so many
    > crackpot ideas relating to colour management.


    Yes, I agree.

    > Adobe RGB is a Working Space Profile, it is one of many, and is supposed to
    > have a colour Gamut similar to Inkjet Printers. sRGB is another Working
    > Space Profile and is similar to the gamut of a Monitor.
    >
    > These Profiles are only part of Colour Management, and Device Profiles are
    > also needed before any proper Colour Managed Workflow can be set up.
    >
    > Have a read at your Editing Program Help Files for Colour Management or ICC
    > Profiles. If you can not find much info then that Program will not be able
    > to use C.M.
    >
    > If you do not have a Colour Managed Workflow in place, then tagging Adobe
    > RGB or sRGB or any other RGB onto your images is of no use whatsoever.
    >
    > Your Photo Lab will probably have a C. M. Workflow, and most of them use
    > sRGB as their Workspace, simply because most of their work comes from P & S
    > camera users, and most of those cameras only have sRGB.


    A good photo lab will have ICC profiles for their printer, and you
    create image files with that profile applied. If you ask the lab
    for ICC profile for their printers, and they don't know what
    that is, find another lab. ;-)

    Color management: The main reason why we need color management is
    due to the way the eye responds to light. It is not linear and is
    not even independent of each channel. The eye actually subtracts
    one color from another to perceive some colors. You can't make the
    range of responses the eye sees with inks or CRTs, or LCDs without
    some special work. And even then the range the total range will
    almost always be lees that what can be p[perceived by the eye.
    Color management tries to correct issues and map colors that can't
    be reproduced into something close. The due to the spectral response
    of inks, colors may appear different depending on the light source,
    or two colors may appear the same but actually be different.

    Start here and read a little about the color spectrum. Ignore the eye
    sensitivity plots--in this page: they don't tell the whole
    story:
    http://www.midnightkite.com/color.html

    Next:

    Introduction to color science
    http://www.techmind.org/colour
    Note the double peak of the x-curve in the first figure--that
    peak in the blue is actually negative response, so the eye
    subtracts blue from the red channel, and that causes a lot
    of the issues and need for color management. The other reason
    is that if the inks don't perfectly match the spectral response
    of the eye, then the colors can't match the eye. No ink
    perfectly matches that response. So we have approximations.

    Out of Gamut: Getting a Handle on Color Management
    Color-geek extraordinaire Bruce Fraser spells out
    the basics in this primer on color management systems.
    http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/13605.html

    Tons of info about color spaces: click on the "info" button
    and work from there.
    http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html

    This is also interesting:
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple

    Get the book:
    Real World Color Management 2nd edition, by Fraser et al.,
    Peachpit Press, 2005.

    More good info:
    http://www.cs.unc.edu/~majumder/color/paper.html

    Here is my digital workflow which illustrates when
    color management steps are done:
    http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/digitalworkflow

    Roger
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Aug 28, 2006
    #9
  10. Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:

    > Roy G wrote:
    >
    >> <> wrote in message
    >> news:...
    >>
    >>> "embedded adobe rgb"
    >>>
    >>> who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    >>> i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    >>> gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    >>> i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    >>> they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    >>> "good eye and color sense" anyway.
    >>>
    >>> so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    >>> quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    >>> what i want?

    >>
    >>
    >> This thread has so far been very informative about the existance of so
    >> many crackpot ideas relating to colour management.

    >
    >
    > Yes, I agree.
    >
    >> Adobe RGB is a Working Space Profile, it is one of many, and is
    >> supposed to have a colour Gamut similar to Inkjet Printers. sRGB is
    >> another Working Space Profile and is similar to the gamut of a Monitor.
    >>
    >> These Profiles are only part of Colour Management, and Device
    >> Profiles are also needed before any proper Colour Managed Workflow can
    >> be set up.
    >>
    >> Have a read at your Editing Program Help Files for Colour Management
    >> or ICC Profiles. If you can not find much info then that Program will
    >> not be able to use C.M.
    >>
    >> If you do not have a Colour Managed Workflow in place, then tagging
    >> Adobe RGB or sRGB or any other RGB onto your images is of no use
    >> whatsoever.
    >>
    >> Your Photo Lab will probably have a C. M. Workflow, and most of them
    >> use sRGB as their Workspace, simply because most of their work comes
    >> from P & S camera users, and most of those cameras only have sRGB.

    >
    >
    > A good photo lab will have ICC profiles for their printer, and you
    > create image files with that profile applied. If you ask the lab
    > for ICC profile for their printers, and they don't know what
    > that is, find another lab. ;-)
    >
    > Color management: The main reason why we need color management is
    > due to the way the eye responds to light. It is not linear and is
    > not even independent of each channel. The eye actually subtracts
    > one color from another to perceive some colors. You can't make the
    > range of responses the eye sees with inks or CRTs, or LCDs without
    > some special work. And even then the range the total range will
    > almost always be lees that what can be p[perceived by the eye.
    > Color management tries to correct issues and map colors that can't
    > be reproduced into something close. The due to the spectral response
    > of inks, colors may appear different depending on the light source,
    > or two colors may appear the same but actually be different.
    >
    > Start here and read a little about the color spectrum. Ignore the eye
    > sensitivity plots--in this page: they don't tell the whole
    > story:
    > http://www.midnightkite.com/color.html
    >
    > Next:
    >
    > Introduction to color science
    > http://www.techmind.org/colour
    > Note the double peak of the x-curve in the first figure--that
    > peak in the blue is actually negative response, so the eye
    > subtracts blue from the red channel, and that causes a lot
    > of the issues and need for color management. The other reason
    > is that if the inks don't perfectly match the spectral response
    > of the eye, then the colors can't match the eye. No ink
    > perfectly matches that response. So we have approximations.
    >
    > Out of Gamut: Getting a Handle on Color Management
    > Color-geek extraordinaire Bruce Fraser spells out
    > the basics in this primer on color management systems.
    > http://www.creativepro.com/story/feature/13605.html
    >
    > Tons of info about color spaces: click on the "info" button
    > and work from there.
    > http://www.brucelindbloom.com/index.html
    >
    > This is also interesting:
    > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple
    >
    > Get the book:
    > Real World Color Management 2nd edition, by Fraser et al.,
    > Peachpit Press, 2005.
    >
    > More good info:
    > http://www.cs.unc.edu/~majumder/color/paper.html
    >
    > Here is my digital workflow which illustrates when
    > color management steps are done:
    > http://www.clarkvision.com/photoinfo/digitalworkflow
    >
    > Roger

    And check out Bill Hilton's example!
     
    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark), Aug 28, 2006
    #10
  11. ASAAR Guest

    On 28 Aug 2006 06:21:44 -0700, Bill Hilton wrote:

    > So to answer your question "what happens if we send Adobe RGB files to
    > a mini lab" look at the difference on your web browser between the sRGB
    > and AdobeRGB versions and note how the saturated colors look duller.
    > The fewer saturated colors you have the less you'll notice the
    > differences.


    Very nice explanation. Clear without unnecessary complexity.
     
    ASAAR, Aug 28, 2006
    #11
  12. Roy G Guest

    <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > "embedded adobe rgb"
    >
    > who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    > i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    > gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    > i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    > they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    > "good eye and color sense" anyway.
    >
    > so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    > quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    > what i want?




    Excellent information Roger and Bill.

    Roger, your workflow is a bit light on details for those who don't already
    know about CM. (Monitor calibration, no double profiling). We all do it
    without any thought, but beginners need every step explained.

    I have produced one for my local Camera Club, it was written with complete
    novices in mind, and also for those who had crackpot versions.

    Go to www.ayrphoto.co.uk then to "Notices and Info" then to "How to print
    for accurate colour".

    It was designed for PCs and Epson Printers using Photoshop or Elements. But
    the principles can be applied to other systems.

    It does not cover profile conversion, before sending files to a Lab. If
    anyone thinks that is needed, I might have a go at adding another section,
    but I never use Labs.

    Roy G
     
    Roy G, Aug 28, 2006
    #12
  13. frederick Guest

    ASAAR wrote:
    > On 28 Aug 2006 06:21:44 -0700, Bill Hilton wrote:
    >
    >> So to answer your question "what happens if we send Adobe RGB files to
    >> a mini lab" look at the difference on your web browser between the sRGB
    >> and AdobeRGB versions and note how the saturated colors look duller.
    >> The fewer saturated colors you have the less you'll notice the
    >> differences.

    >
    > Very nice explanation. Clear without unnecessary complexity.
    >

    Except that if the lab uses a colour aware process, then it will make
    (almost) no difference whether your images are saved with aRGB or sRGB
    embedded.
    And if ASAAR is using a colour aware web browser (IE on a mac), then
    your example won't work.
    Some complexity is needed.
     
    frederick, Aug 28, 2006
    #13
  14. Annika1980 Guest

    Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
    > A good photo lab will have ICC profiles for their printer, and you
    > create image files with that profile applied. If you ask the lab
    > for ICC profile for their printers, and they don't know what
    > that is, find another lab. ;-)
    >


    I once asked a guy at the local Ritz Camera what kind of color space
    does their Fuji Frontier prefer? He said, "I think we usually use
    JPG."
     
    Annika1980, Aug 28, 2006
    #14
  15. Bill Hilton Guest

    >frederick wrote:
    > Except that if the lab uses a colour aware process, then it will make
    > (almost) no difference whether your images are saved with aRGB or sRGB
    > embedded.


    If the lab expects and assumes the images to be tagged with a certain
    space and you give them files in a different working space then it will
    indeed make a difference in how they appear.

    If the lab does the conversion for you then you're right, it won't
    matter, but the mini labs don't do this conversion (they assume sRGB)
    and the best custom labs actually give you a discount if you do it
    correctly yourself and convert to their device specific profile for
    their printer and paper (ie, you're no longer in an abstract working
    space). So it's always best to give them what they want.

    > And if ASAAR is using a colour aware web browser (IE on a mac), then
    > your example won't work.


    Actually the examples I gave DO work as I described because I stripped
    off the ICC profiles when I made the jpegs ... so there is no profile
    for your "colour aware web browser" to convert to, if you have one.

    > Some complexity is needed.


    It appears even the simple example I gave is too complex for some ...
    if you want the complex details read "Real World Color Management" ...

    Bill
     
    Bill Hilton, Aug 28, 2006
    #15
  16. Bill K Guest

    Roy G wrote:
    > <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > "embedded adobe rgb"
    > >
    > > who is this supposed to help....me or the printer? if there's one thing
    > > i've learned over the years dealing with printers, it's that no one
    > > gets it right. i've given them 4x5's with kodak color bars/grey scale.
    > > i've sent them RAW files. even FPO's with sample prints that i liked.
    > > they never get it right, and ultimately it requires a printer with a
    > > "good eye and color sense" anyway.
    > >
    > > so this "adobe rgb". does it guarantee anything? does it help me to
    > > quantify what i want? does it help the printer to be more faithful to
    > > what i want?

    >
    >
    >
    > Excellent information Roger and Bill.
    >
    > Roger, your workflow is a bit light on details for those who don't already
    > know about CM. (Monitor calibration, no double profiling). We all do it
    > without any thought, but beginners need every step explained.
    >
    > I have produced one for my local Camera Club, it was written with complete
    > novices in mind, and also for those who had crackpot versions.
    >
    > Go to www.ayrphoto.co.uk then to "Notices and Info" then to "How to print
    > for accurate colour".
    >
    > It was designed for PCs and Epson Printers using Photoshop or Elements. But
    > the principles can be applied to other systems.
    >
    > It does not cover profile conversion, before sending files to a Lab. If
    > anyone thinks that is needed, I might have a go at adding another section,
    > but I never use Labs.
    >
    > Roy G



    For a grouchy old Scotsman you're pretty knowledgeable
    --
    Webfoot
     
    Bill K, Aug 28, 2006
    #16
  17. frederick Guest

    Bill Hilton wrote:
    >> frederick wrote:
    >> Except that if the lab uses a colour aware process, then it will make
    >> (almost) no difference whether your images are saved with aRGB or sRGB
    >> embedded.

    >
    > If the lab expects and assumes the images to be tagged with a certain
    > space and you give them files in a different working space then it will
    > indeed make a difference in how they appear.
    >
    > If the lab does the conversion for you then you're right, it won't
    > matter, but the mini labs don't do this conversion (they assume sRGB)
    > and the best custom labs actually give you a discount if you do it
    > correctly yourself and convert to their device specific profile for
    > their printer and paper (ie, you're no longer in an abstract working
    > space). So it's always best to give them what they want.
    >
    >> And if ASAAR is using a colour aware web browser (IE on a mac), then
    >> your example won't work.

    >
    > Actually the examples I gave DO work as I described because I stripped
    > off the ICC profiles when I made the jpegs ... so there is no profile
    > for your "colour aware web browser" to convert to, if you have one.
    >
    >> Some complexity is needed.

    >
    > It appears even the simple example I gave is too complex for some ...
    > if you want the complex details read "Real World Color Management" ...
    >

    I assumed that your examples had embedded colour space profiles - I
    should have (done the obvious and) looked at them first...
    The original poster queried use of embedded aRGB - will it solve his
    colour consistency problems. The answer is no.
     
    frederick, Aug 28, 2006
    #17
  18. Joan Guest

    Thanks Bill. I knew some of that, having read "Getting Colour Right"
    and knew it would be good to bring it out in a discussion. Call it a
    troll if you wish. :)

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    "Bill Hilton" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    : >Joan wrote:
    : > Roy, can you give us the next chapter? The one that explains what
    : > happens if we send Adobe RGB files to a mini lab.
    :
    : I'm not Roy but here's what's going on ... the same color will have
    : lower RGB values in a wider gamut working space than in a lower
    gamut
    : space so if you print or display it ignoring the working space info
    : then saturated colors look duller.
    :
    : To see this in action look at these three links (below) ... I took a
    : RAW file image of a red bird and converted it three times, once in
    sRGB
    : (smaller gamut), then AdobeRGB (mid-sized gamut), finally in
    ProPhoto
    : (all visible light, so extremely wide gamut). The color "red" was
    : approximately rendered as follows (R/G/B values) ...
    :
    : srgb 200/77/39
    : adobe rgb 158/53/0
    : prophoto rgb 144/86/46
    :
    : In Photoshop or any other program that recognizes the profiles these
    : all look pretty similar, but you can see what happens when you
    ignore
    : the profiles by looking at the images in a non-color managed
    : application like your web browser ... these three have been
    converted
    : to jpegs without converting to sRGB first and you can see how dull
    the
    : reds are in the prophoto rgb example ...
    :
    : http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/hilton_prophoto.jpg
    : http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/hilton_adobergb.jpg
    : http://members.aol.com/bhilton665/hilton_srgb.jpg
    :
    : If you download these and open in Photoshop and assign the correct
    : working space to each of them you'll see that they suddenly look
    alike
    : again. In other words "144/86/46" looks bright red when the program
    : knows it's ProPhoto working space but dull red when the program
    ignores
    : the working space info.
    :
    : So to answer your question "what happens if we send Adobe RGB files
    to
    : a mini lab" look at the difference on your web browser between the
    sRGB
    : and AdobeRGB versions and note how the saturated colors look duller.
    : The fewer saturated colors you have the less you'll notice the
    : differences.
    :
    : Bill
    :
     
    Joan, Aug 29, 2006
    #18
  19. Joan Guest

    How did you control your mirth?

    --
    Joan
    http://www.flickr.com/photos/joan-in-manly

    "Annika1980" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    :
    : Roger N. Clark (change username to rnclark) wrote:
    : > A good photo lab will have ICC profiles for their printer, and you
    : > create image files with that profile applied. If you ask the lab
    : > for ICC profile for their printers, and they don't know what
    : > that is, find another lab. ;-)
    : >
    :
    : I once asked a guy at the local Ritz Camera what kind of color space
    : does their Fuji Frontier prefer? He said, "I think we usually use
    : JPG."
    :
     
    Joan, Aug 29, 2006
    #19
  20. Vladislav Guest

    A printer color space is a CMY or CMYK, there is no body here who can
    prove - what is better for current ink printed on current paper. If you
    care about color reproduction, try a different papers. Do a many prints
    of the same image - select what you like. As i sad, a color
    reproduction is a some shape bounded by match coordinates in color
    space. We just talking about nothing, you should see a gamut in 3D
    space for your printer and adobe rgb. Take a light box, select a light
    D50, take a monitor and compare. ICC profile not a cure. Gamut mapping
    from profile maker is a mix of true and mistakes.

    http://www.terekhoff.com
     
    Vladislav, Aug 29, 2006
    #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. no-spam
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    1,306
    Serengeti
    Jul 29, 2003
  2. Paul Furman

    Spastic Jittery thing in preview pane

    Paul Furman, Oct 2, 2003, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    1,081
    Leonidas Jones
    Oct 4, 2003
  3. Chaos Master

    Odd thing with nightly builds of Firefox?

    Chaos Master, Aug 7, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    532
    --BRIAN--
    Aug 7, 2004
  4. Tony Raven

    The thing I hate about FF and TB

    Tony Raven, Dec 9, 2004, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    476
    Splibbilla
    Dec 13, 2004
  5. Keith

    Funny thing about Thunderbird

    Keith, Dec 1, 2005, in forum: Firefox
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    530
    Leonidas Jones
    Dec 1, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page