sRGB or AdobeRGB Colour Space?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Paul, Nov 6, 2004.

  1. Paul

    Paul Guest

    Hello group.

    If I wanted to just print photo's, I.E. Not commercial use, is it better to
    use sRGB or AdobeRGB colour space?

    Looking around the internet, it seems like AdobeRGB has a wider spectrum,
    but apparently most labs are not capable of printing with a colour space of
    greater than sRGB.
     
    Paul, Nov 6, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Like you state it depsnds on the lab, mine when I send files
    for Lambda prints has informed me they get better results from
    tagged Adobe 1998 files. Now when I send files for their other printers
    they are untagged. One thing I try to always do is provide either an
    optical reference or an inkjet reference depending on what I am doing
    the print for (Retouching, etc).

    AdobeRGB does have a wider gamut as others have stated, so you could
    tag the files initially as AdobeRGB and then resave them when needed with
    whatever profile you need.
    --
    LF Website @ http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

    "To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
    or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
    is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
    to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
     
    Gregory W Blank, Nov 6, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Paul

    bmoag Guest

    Here in the colonies this works for me:
    For color management purposes consistency probably matters more than the
    differences in color gamut between sRGB or AdobeRGB, presuming an inkjet
    print is your ultimate purpose.
    If you are using color management and stick to one space you will hopefully
    get accustomed to the color gamut translations between image, monitor and
    printer color spaces and be able to get more predictable printing results.
    Monitor calibration is a vital part of the process, however, so that the
    software has known reference points for translating between monitor, image
    and printer color spaces.
    If your digital camera only saves in sRBG, as most do, then it will make no
    difference if you translate to Adobe RGB in Photoshop and work in that color
    space forever after as AdobeRGB is a bigger color space.
    If you take an image created in AdobeRGB in a camera or scanner and
    translate into sRGB you can lose color information because sRGB is a smaller
    color space. So if your camera or scanner creates images in AdobeRGB it is
    best to keep the image in that color space even if you may never be able to
    perceive that loss of color information in what you see on the monitor or in
    your print.
    Neither sRGB or AdobeRGB can be entirely reproduced by inkjet printers
    anyway and software is going to perform a brute translation of your image to
    the printer's color space when you make a print.
    Consistent color management really does not let you control the hit that the
    printer driver makes on your image but it significantly softens the blow.
    Now, the real question is: if 24 bit AdobeRGB is already a wider color space
    than inkjet printers can reproduce why are many photographers obsessed with
    48 bit color?
     
    bmoag, Nov 6, 2004
    #3
  4. You generally can't put a space as wide as Adobe RGB on paper. There
    can still be a point in using it for editing -- it gives *you* rather
    than the color management software control over what is done with
    out-of-gamut (in sRGB) colors in the original scene. So a sensible
    workflow could be to capture in Adobe RGB, edit in Adobe RGB, but edit
    down to something that fits in sRGB, and pass the image to the lab in
    sRGB (which, as you say, most-all of them want).
     
    David Dyer-Bennet, Nov 7, 2004
    #4
  5. Paul

    Aerticus Guest

    Probably because image editing in 48 bit keeps things a little sharper for
    longer than editing in 24 bit

    Aerticus

    - snipped -
     
    Aerticus, Nov 7, 2004
    #5
  6. Paul

    Rob Guest

    48 bit vs. 24 bit has nothing to do with 'Sharpness' It is the amount of
    tones you have available. Working in 48 bit gives you greater control of the
    tonal range when making adjustment in curves, or levels. Look up the
    difference in what a camera sensor records in Raw vs. JPEG.
     
    Rob, Nov 8, 2004
    #6
    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.