Login or Join Now

Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more

Username:
Password:
Remember Me

Can't Access your Account?

New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!

Like 0

Preferred Colour Space?

Join Now

Join ePHOTOzine, the friendliest photography community.

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!

Leave a Comment
    • «
    • 1
    • »
    janeez
    janeez e2 Member 51161 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 9:32 PM

    Not wishing to open a can of worms here (like RAW vs JPEG) but what colour space is the preferred choice? Never considered this before as up until now I have always used sRGB but recently read an article and checked with my manual (Nikon D300s) which suggested Adobe RGB could be better. As I do a fair amount of processing in photoshop and rarely do my own printing then should I be using Adobe to get better colour results? Would this be of benefit when shooting weddings or portraits or is it really just suited to landscape photography? Sorry, loads of questions here but would be grateful for all your thoughts.

    Jane

    Sponsored Links
    Sponsored Links 
    26 Aug 2010 - 9:32 PM

    Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

    cameracat
    cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 9:56 PM

    The basics of what Nikon say in the manuals is this.

    If your images will be going straight to print with very little post processing, Then sRGB will do the job.

    If your images are going to be heavily post processed, use Adobe RGB.

    Raw just gives you a whole lot more scope for post processing work using either of these colour spaces.


    Quote: Would this be of benefit when shooting weddings or portraits

    Depends on how much you intend mangling the images during any post work.

    Adobe RGB is not purely for landscape, Its just a much wider colour space, ie: Has a bigger gamut of colour.

    Therefore more room for making fine adjustments.

    Though for weddings and portraits etc, It does/can add a lot of time to your workflow......Sad

    Last Modified By cameracat at 26 Aug 2010 - 10:01 PM Helpful Post! This post was flagged as helpful
    janeez
    janeez e2 Member 51161 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:02 PM

    RAW has always been my choice but until now I have not given any consideration to the colour space.

    justin c
    justin c  104510 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:06 PM

    I'd use either Adobe RGB or ProPhoto every time in preference to sRGB for the advantage of having the larger colour space. You can always convert to a narrower colour space at a later stage if desired but you can never put back what wasn't there in the first place.

    Helpful Post! This post was flagged as helpful
    janeez
    janeez e2 Member 51161 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:08 PM

    Sorry, just picked up your 2nd comment. I wouldn't say I over do the work on my images and if it is going to add to the time then it probably isn't worth it.

    LensYews
    LensYews  51300 forum posts United Kingdom1 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:27 PM

    I use sRGB as my photos either go straight to printer on site, or online with minimal editing. The labs I use also specify sRGB.

    Kris_Dutson
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:30 PM

    As I print on a 'home' printer then I use sRGB as that's what they're set up for. Smile

    NexusImages
    NexusImages e2 Member 71844 forum postsNexusImages vcard United Kingdom4 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:43 PM

    Generally I use sRGB but I find that some HDR software converts to Adobe RGB. Having read the previous replies, I think I will change my in-cam setting to Adobe RGB and convert later for print. Interesting thread, especially for folk like me who didn't really fully understand why I was stuck in sRGB. I have to add that the lab I use for print specify sRGB.

    Last Modified By NexusImages at 26 Aug 2010 - 10:44 PM
    janeez
    janeez e2 Member 51161 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:47 PM

    Hi Kris.
    Seems I just missed you at the WW2 re-enactment at Maiden Newton back in July. Keith and Sandy from YCC bumped into you there as I was off buying a burger! When I rejoined them they said they had stopped to have a chat with you. Never mind, might see you next year if they hold the event again. Smile

    justin c
    justin c  104510 forum posts England36 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:47 PM


    Quote: As I print on a 'home' printer then I use sRGB as that's what they're set up for.

    That's incorrect. Many modern 'home' inkjet printers are able to print colours outside of the sRGB colour gamut.

    Kris_Dutson
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:50 PM

    Mine can't.

    janeez
    janeez e2 Member 51161 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 10:53 PM

    My printer has the option to print Adobe RGB in the colour management file. It is an HP Photosmart 8250. A few years old now but not a bad printer.

    cameracat
    cameracat  108578 forum posts Norfolk Island61 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 11:15 PM


    Quote: add to the time then it probably isn't worth it

    Thats the problem, If you have a big job or two to get through, Cutting down the number of post operations per job, Can make up a lot of time, That said you can always " Batch " convert your images, Lets say from Adobe RGB to sRGB, At the same time convert from RAW to Tiff or JPEG, Depending on the software, You can batch all at the same time.

    So just for those few details the added time factor, Is not going to add up to a whole lot.

    Its only where you are making individual adjustments on a large number of images, That the time starts clocking up.

    The last thing, That always causes some controversy is, You computers Monitor, Not many monitors can actually display/show the full Adobe RGB gamut, Most default to sRGB anyhow.

    So whilst you have more working space with Adobe RGB, You can't always see the entire gamut.

    Mad or what, The only solution is a very very expensive monitor, Is it worth it.....? To some maybe, But its debatable if anyone outside of the photographic business would notice or care, So long as they are happy with the images, Thats all that counts.

    Whatever, You could always give it a try, If you find it slows your workflow to much, Switch back to sRGB.

    Wink

    janeez
    janeez e2 Member 51161 forum postsjaneez vcard United Kingdom8 Constructive Critique Points
    26 Aug 2010 - 11:49 PM

    Interesting stuff. I do "batch" convert RAW to JPEG but did not realise the same could apply to Adobe RGB to sRGB. As for spending a small fortune on a new monitor, I think I know the answer to that oneGrin.

    • «
    • 1
    • »

    Add a Comment

    You must be a member to leave a comment

    Username:
    Password:
    Remember me:
    Un-tick this box if you want to login each time you visit.