Assign and then convert to Adobe RGB (1998), or skip assignment.

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Robert Montgomery, Feb 7, 2012.

  1. How can I get Photoshop to save my digital files as Adobe RGB 1998
    files?

    My two Canon cameras save the files as EXIF JPEGS, but when I look in
    my Mac's Finder in Get Info, every digital file from my cameras has
    the sRGBIEC61966-2.1 profile embedded in them.

    In Photoshop, Edit > Settings > is set to "Adobe RGB 1998
    (Perceptual)" and Working Spaces is set to "Adobe RGB (1998).

    Color Management Policies > RGB is set to "Preserve Embedded Profiles.

    I don't know if I should assign the Adobe RGB 1998 profile first and
    then convert to Adobe RGB 1998, or skip the assignment and go directly
    to conversion to Adobe RGB (1998).
     
    Robert Montgomery, Feb 7, 2012
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Robert Montgomery

    me Guest


    What is the point of changing to a wider color space with images that
    do not contain any information which might be contained in such
    additional color space?

    Not the as starting with a raw file and then converting to aRGB.

    In either case I believe the proper procedure is to convert.
     
    me, Feb 7, 2012
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Why would you want that?
    You can probably tell your cameras to save them as aRGB, too.
    Why would you use such a small working space? Using a larger
    (16bit) working space keeps your choices larger.
    That's probably it.
    Try it out.

    If you *assign* aRGB, you basically tell the world "This file
    is aRGB" when the values inside (the RGB data triples) are only
    right for sRGB.

    Anyway, unless you actually *change* the image so some colours
    in it leave sRGB space, you're not winning anything at all.
    It's like buying a larger carport to house the same cooper mini.[1]


    -Wolfgang

    [1] Actually, it's slightly worse: the carport (aRGB JPEG) can
    only house 256 distinct sizes in each dimension --- just as
    the smaller one (sRGB JPEG). But they're at different sizes.
    So the mini has to be stretched or compressed slightly in
    each dimension, and it's proportions will be slightly off.
     
    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Feb 8, 2012
    #3
  4. I know. But I don't know why the camera manuals say that the cameras'
    file format is EXIF JPEG, whereas my computer says that the JPEGS I
    uploaded to my computer have the sRGBIEC61966-2.1 profile.

    I assume that the profiles have merely been (automatically)assigned to
    my JPEGS by Photoshop, rather than having been embedded.. That would
    mean that the JPEGs' spectrum haven't been clipped, right?

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Feb 8, 2012
    #4
  5. I know. But I don't understand why the JPEGs I uploaded from my
    cameras to my computer are sRGBIEC61966-2.1 files, whereas my Canon
    manuals say that the file format for pictures made with the cameras as
    EXIF JPEGs.

    I assume that the sRGBIEC61966-2.files merely have been assigned their
    profiles by Photoshop, rather than having the profiles converted from
    EXIF to sRGBIEC61966-2.1. I know I didn't manually open all those
    files and convert them to sRGBIEC61966-2.1.

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Feb 8, 2012
    #5
  6. Robert Montgomery

    Vance Guest

    If I'm reading you correctly, your camera's manual states that the camera is producing JPEG images and default for most cameras is the sRGB color space. JPEG is not a color space, it's a file format and EXIF is information about the image.

    Part of the EXIF information would be the color space (the pallette of colors available) and that is what you are seeing.

    Most people don't have monitors with extended color display capability who aren't pros and almost all commercial printers print using the sRGB color space. You probably can't see the Adobe RGB color space on your monitor, the people who may see your images online probably can't see it and you probably aren't going to get it out of prints. Why bother?

    Vance
     
    Vance, Feb 8, 2012
    #6
  7. Robert Montgomery

    Vance Guest

    Addendum: You have Photoshop setup to preserve the 'embedded color space', so there is your answer to where the color space was assigned - your camera.
     
    Vance, Feb 8, 2012
    #7
  8. Robert Montgomery

    Robert Lord Guest

    Thanks, Vance.

    I just called Canon and asked a technical service worker, who told me
    that all of the digital Canon cameras produce files that are untagged,
    which contradicts your statement that the cameras are tagging my files
    with the sRGBIEC61966-2.1 colour profiles.

    Neither of my camera manuals appear to have any option for changing
    the colour profile assigned or embedded to the files.

    Your advice contradicts Adobe's advice. You wrote, "You probably
    can't see the Adobe RGB color space on your monitor, the people who
    may see your images online probably can't see it and you probably
    aren't going to get it out of prints. Why bother?" It's common
    knowledge among graphics professionals that Adobe RGB (1998) is the
    profile to use for print because it has a wider spectrum than sRGB or
    sRGBIEC61966-2.1

    Adobe's Web site says, "For a mixed RGB and CMYK print
    workflow...choose the North America Prepress 2 setting. This option
    sets the RGB working space to Adobe RGB (1998) and the CMYK working
    space to U.S. Web Coasted (SWOP) v2.

    Also, Photoshop has a section at View > Proof Setup > Adobe RGB. You
    wrote, "You probably can't see the Adobe RGB color space on your
    monitor". Why would that proof preview for Adobe RGB be available in
    Photoshop if it were useless?

    I'm printing on two Epson printers. One has seven colors and the other
    has eight colors. Maybe you're assuming that I'm going to have my
    files printed on a four-color offset press, which have three or four
    less colors than my Epson printers, and therefore have a narrower ink
    spectrum than my printers.

    Robert
     
    Robert Lord, Feb 8, 2012
    #8
  9. Robert Montgomery

    me Guest



    My copy is currently loaned out, but all your answers can be found in:

    http://www.colorremedies.com/realworldcolor/
     
    me, Feb 8, 2012
    #9
  10. Unmitigated rubbish! Unless you're using a camera from 1995!
    May not. Depends entirely on the camera. What models?

    The rest of the questions really need an entire course to cover all the
    variables.
     
    John McWilliams, Feb 9, 2012
    #10
  11. Robert Montgomery

    Vance Guest

    Thank you for your response, I can see where I made mistakes in how I
    said things.
    My Canons allow me to assign a color space, so not all Canons produce
    untagged files and they produce files using that color space. I
    haven't looked at that part of the manual for quite awhile, but I seem
    to remember the default color space is sRGB which could very well be
    untagged since it is pretty much the assumed color space across all
    devices. Every device pretty much handles sRGB and is an adequate
    color space. It's a good statistical bet on Adobes part to assume the
    sRGB color space and assign it for untagged files.
    It's different with my Canons, but you didn't mention which model you
    are using.
    I use Adobe RGB because my Eizo monitor can produce about 97-98
    percent of the Adobe space at a cost of about $1,900 USD, but that is
    what it is designed to do and my customers have similarly capable
    monitors. The vast majority of monitors out there that people will
    view a web image on won't handle that color space and use sRGB. They
    won't see it. As far as printing goes, your printer probably isn't
    going to give you the full gamut and most commercial printers sure
    won't. A wide gamut printer like the custom printer I use has, will
    pretty much give you the full gamut with the right paper combination.

    I work in a totally managed color environment from camera, through
    monitor display to the printer and it is the same color space my
    customers use. It's advertising work and that makes it worthwhile to
    invest in the equipment to fully utilize the Adobe RGB. However,
    where the full gamut can't be realized in the end product whatever its
    form, the question is still 'Why bother?' Going to four color offset
    is a different ball game and you have spot inks like Pantone to help
    overcome some of it's gamut limitations.

    There are legitimate arguments by professionals that it makes the most
    sense to just work in sRGB from the start.

    Hopefully, I expressed myself a little clearer.
    It isn't useless if you have the equipment to display the Adobe RGB
    color gamut. It is a pro package after all.
    I use a Canon imagePROGRAF iPF5100 which uses 12 pigment inks and
    produces a pretty wide gamut, but not the total Adobe gamut and the
    paper makes a tremendous difference in the print. Realistically, sRGB
    produces beautiful images and all output devices can handle it, so it
    can make a lot of sense to use it as you color space from the
    beginning.

    Just an opinion.

    Regards,

    Vance
     
    Vance, Feb 9, 2012
    #11
  12. I'm not sure what you really want to accomplish.

    You can convert to Adobe RGB when you open the file (that's a preference
    setting), but there's no point if the original is sRGB. To get any
    benefit you need to change the camera settings as well.

    Or, if you want maximum flexibility and best results, shoot RAW, have
    ACR create a ProPhoto RGB image, use that as your working space in
    Photoshop, and convert to the final space you want (and Adobe is mostly
    a bad choice as a final space, too) at the end.
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 9, 2012
    #12
  13. Those are different, unrelated, things.

    JPEG is a file format. (and EXIF is a meta-data format).

    sRGB is a color profile. It's used inside JPEGS, TIFFs, PSD files, and
    other image formats .
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 9, 2012
    #13

  14. ARGB isn't too terrible a choice if you are going to give the file to
    someone who is going to print it on a press; ARGB (in my experience)
    converts better to CMYK than sRGB.

    -Ryan McGinnis
    The BIG Storm Picture: http://bigstormpicture.com PGP Key 0x65115E4C
    Follow my storm chasing adventures at http://bigstormpicture.blogspot.com
    [email protected]: http://bit.ly/oDW1pT [email protected]:http://bit.ly/aMH6Qd
     
    Ryan McGinnis, Feb 10, 2012
    #14
  15. Labs I've worked with want sRGB, even for "press-printed" books. I
    haven't done much of anything going to offset printing. For going to
    any competent final printer, of course what you want to do is prepare
    *what they want* to print from. For going to a non-competent final
    printer...run screaming!
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Feb 10, 2012
    #15
  16. To get a wider gamut in my prints than is provided by sRGBIEC61966-2.1
    files. (That's the difference between the two profiles.) My desire
    to get the wider spectrum in my prints from the Adobe RGB (1998)
    profile versus sRGBIEC61966-2.1 is the reason why I started this
    thread.
    How? I don't see anything in the cameras' manuals or in the camera's
    user interface to do that. The terms "color profile", "profile, "sRGB"
    and "Adobe" and "1998" don't appear anywhere in the camera manuals of
    either the Canon Powershot 1200 or the Canon Powershot SX 20 IS.
    Tell that to Vance. He keeps on writing in this thread that I don't
    benefit from the wider gamut of Adobe RGB 1998 compared to
    sRGBIEC61966-2.1.

    He insists that Adobe RGB is TOO WIDE for my Epson 7600 and 2400
    printers, while you claim that it's NOT WIDE ENOUGH! Who's right?

    Also, I gave up on 16-bit Pro Photo profiles because they disable
    Photoshop's filters, and some of those filters are critical for my
    image editing work.
    I've tried it out probably on hundreds or thousands of files over the
    years.
    When I do assign Adobe RGB (1998) profile to my images, I of course
    saturate them in Photoshop to take advantage of Adobe RGB's wider
    gamut.
     
    Robert Montgomery, Feb 19, 2012
    #16
  17. From what I can tell, my photos seem to come out of my cameras
    untagged, because in Photoshop > Edit > Assign Profile, the button
    appears beside "Don't Color Manage This document" which means that any
    of the three profiles could be assigned to embedded to the files.
    Why is that better than assignment?

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Feb 19, 2012
    #17
  18. Photoshop is set to "preserve embedded color space" but I think the
    files coming out of my camera don't have an embedded color space"
    because Photoshop > Edit > Assign Profiles has the button next to
    "Don't Color Manage this file".
    Canon Powershot A1200 and Powershot IS 20 IS.
    I want a wider gamut of Adobe RGB 1998 for my printed work – not for
    Internet work.
    I have seven- and eight-color printers partly because they provide a
    wider gamut that four-color offset printers. Are you telling me that
    my printers can't show the wider gamut of Adobe RGB (1998), compared
    to sRGBIEC61966.2.1?
    Actually, I'm still confused.
    I have seven- and eight-color printers partly because they provide a
    wider gamut that four-color offset printers. Are you telling me that
    my printers can't show the wider gamut of Adobe RGB (1998), compared
    to sRGBIEC61966.2.1? ( I'm printing on Epson Exhibition fine art
    canvas and Epson Somerset Velvet fine art paper).

    Are you telling me that my Apple Imac monitor can distinguish between
    Adobe RGB 1998 and sRGB when viewed in the latest version of Photoshop
    CS?
    I'm hoping to get definitive answers – nor just opinions. Thanks for
    trying to help – even though I'm still confused.

    Robert
     
    Robert Montgomery, Feb 19, 2012
    #18
  19. Robert Montgomery

    me Guest


    But your sources images don't contain any of this extended color space
    information. So all you are doing is wasting time and energy worrying
    about this, unless you do specific editing which would add such
    content, which I doubt given what you have posted on this thread.
     
    me, Feb 19, 2012
    #19
  20. Robert Montgomery

    me Guest


    Sorry I meant not the same as starting with a raw file and then
    processing to aRGB. If you don't know what a raw file is, then you are
    far from being able to use aRGB unless you camera specifically saves
    to that.
    Because your original profile would appear to be sRGB. Just
    reassigning the color space is not the correct procedure even if a
    color profile isn't embedded in the images.You would need to convert
    to it. That said, as your original content doesn't make use of the
    extended space you are fooling yourself that you gain anything by
    changing to it, unless you are doing specific edits which would add
    colors outside of sRGB.
     
    me, Feb 19, 2012
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.