Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


PRIZES GALORE! Enter The ePHOTOzine Exclusive Christmas Prize Draw; Over £10,000 Worth of Prizes! Plus A Gift For Everybody On Christmas Day!

ProPhoto RGB


Dave_Canon 8 940 United Kingdom
25 Apr 2009 8:13PM
Having just acquired LightRoom 2, I notice that the working colourspace defaulted to ProPhoto RGB. Up to now I have been working with Adobe RGB (1998) at 16 bits. I am trying to decide whether to continue with Adobe RGB or use ProPhoto RGB.

I have had a quick scour of the internet on this topic but would like to hear any personal experience of ProPhoto RGB from Pixalo members. I have noted that Bruce Fraser promoted using ProPhoto but also offered several warnings about generating non-visible colours. Although I have a printer with K3 inks, is there really any significant advantage if I use ProPhoto and what are the drawbacks noting I am already editing in 16 bits anyway.

Dave

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

User_Removed 10 17.9k 8 Norway
25 Apr 2009 8:46PM
If you - like most of us - are an 'Average Jo(e) Dave, set the Preferences in LR to Adobe RGB and continue as before. ProPhoto does have a larger colourspace but, if your output is mainly web conversions and localised printing constrained to A3+ (possibly A2) then there is nothing to be gained.

All that said (! Grin) there will be those of a differing opinion BUT... if your situation is that I've outlined above then there is very very little to be gained by altering anything.

My standard output from LR is a 16-bit TIFF file and then into PS btw...

HTH's
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
25 Apr 2009 10:27PM
As I understand it, K3 inks are capable of producing colours outside of the Adobe RGB gamut, so for that reason alone ProPhoto RGB is surely justified?
miptog 9 3.5k 61 United Kingdom
26 Apr 2009 12:10AM
I believe Lightroom states, somewhere in the documentation, that ii uses a colourspace based upon ProPhotoRGB, rather the specfically ProphotoRGB.
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
26 Apr 2009 8:13AM
Lightroom uses a linear-encoded version of ProPhoto RGB internally (with a gamma of 1.0), but displays images with an sRGB tonal response curve applied in a proprietary colour space known as Melissa RGB. In other words - it displays the pic in a way that we can relate to (rather like the way a camera monitor displays a jpeg).

I don't use Lightroom, but when you select an output space you should also be able to observe shifts in the histogram. The theory goes that you'll achieve the highest quality prints by using the smallest colour space which encapsulates the photo, but in practice a lot of colour management experts (which I'm very far from being) seem to uniformly output in ProPhoto RGB.

I guess that producing non-visible colours is hazardous, but less so when you have control over colour-management and the final-results.
User_Removed 10 17.9k 8 Norway
26 Apr 2009 8:22AM

Quote:As I understand it, K3 inks are capable of producing colours outside of the Adobe RGB gamut, so for that reason alone ProPhoto RGB is surely justified?


Very possibly Glenn but as you say, final out is dependant on using a full, colour-managed workflow - and that is what really matters. Using ProPhotoRGB in an un-managed workflow is akin to using a D3x to take nothing but family snaps.
Nick_w e2
7 4.1k 99 England
26 Apr 2009 9:11AM
For print it makes sense to use the maximum Gamut..just watch tho if you use the images for upload as when you change colour space to sRGB, sometimes you can get colour shifts, particularly (or more noticable) in the Greens and Reds, when it tries to render the colours that fall outside the new colour space.
User_Removed 5 694 3 Scotland
26 Apr 2009 10:22AM
If you are using canned paper profiles then I would doubt you will see any difference to your prints using ProPhoto. Photoshop uses the printer profile to adjust colours that appear in your document to those that can be reproduced by the printer. This is not the full printer gamut but the range available via the profile.

K3 inks are capable of exceeding Adobe RGB so the use of ProPhoto makes sense but it will require far more elaborate profiles which means investment in hardware or paying for pro profiles.
Dave_Canon 8 940 United Kingdom
26 Apr 2009 12:14PM

Quote:Quote:Maybe you could lazily copy this post and paste it over at Pixalo

This is "ePHOTOzine"



Sorry about that but when I started the post I meant to edit it but was distracted. I provide a lot of advice to people on three forums but do occassionally have a question myself. When I do have a question, it is usually more obscure because I will have already searched for an answer. I often find I need to ask on more than one forum to get answers. EPHOTOzene has a lot of members so there is almost always someone who can provide an answer. Pixalo is very small by comparison but does have several particularly knowledgeable professional photographers.

Anyway the answers so far are helpful.

Dave
GlennH 9 1.9k 1 France
26 Apr 2009 12:21PM

Quote:
K3 inks are capable of exceeding Adobe RGB so the use of ProPhoto makes sense but it will require far more elaborate profiles which means investment in hardware or paying for pro profiles.



From what I've read, the top-end Epson printers that use K3 and UltraChrome HDR inksets are remarkably consistent in their output, and therefore the canned profiles are also accurate.
User_Removed 5 694 3 Scotland
26 Apr 2009 12:43PM
Fully agree, my point was that you will probably need to go beyond the canned profile to make best use of the ProPhoto RGB colour space/K3 ink combination. This will probably entail generating thousands of colour patches for colour analysis. The norm is hundreds of patches.
SueEley 8 271 96 Wales
27 Apr 2009 5:30PM
Umm - have used ProPhoto but always convert to my paper's profile before printing or sRGB for web or (unless advised otherwise) projected..... So, if I understand rightly, ProPhoto would be of no benefit to me and I might as well stick with Adobe RGB (which I currently use).
Nick_w e2
7 4.1k 99 England
27 Apr 2009 5:45PM

Quote:Umm - have used ProPhoto but always convert to my paper's profile before printing or sRGB


Why??? Most quality printers can reproduce the gamut in adobeRGB, why reduce the subtlety of the colours? Yes for the web as IE can't recognise aRGB (tho Firefox can with an add on).

EDIT: Just re-read, you are confusing things the printer profile is for it interprets the colours from the embedded colour space adobeRGB etc - if you need more information read here .

Remember if you convert to sRGB its pointless converting back as yov'e already disposed of the extra colour information.
SueEley 8 271 96 Wales
27 Apr 2009 6:17PM
Yes, it is PS/printer interface that converts to the paper profile, not me. Though I have noticed that I get a clipping warning sometimes in the print preview, and if I don't do something about this I can get some poor reproduction. Sorry to be confusing!

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.