The question has often been posted regarding the differences between Adobe RGB and sRGB. To better understand these two color spaces, lets try to see them visually.

http://louieaguinaldo.weebly.com/uploads/5/0/8/3/5083585/9016958.jpg

The white diagram represents the sRGB color space. The yellow diagram represents the Adobe RGB color space. Notice that the Adobe RGB color space is much wider. There are more ranges of color, that can be found in the Adobe RGB color space than in sRGB. The advantage is clearly in the blue to green color ranges.

sRGB is the default color space of most digital devices from cameras to scanners to monitors. Although, some devices allow captures to be done using the Adobe RGB color space. This gives you the advantage of being able to capture a wider range (gamut) of color.

To be able to utilize this color advantage, you would have needed to capture your image using the Adobe RGB color space in your DSLR (if your camera is capable of doing so). Or you can achieve this by shooting RAW and converting to Adobe RGB upon post processing. It will not work if you captured an image in sRGB and then convert to Adobe RGB in photoshop. If the colors were not captured to begin with, converting to Adobe RGB will not create those missing colors.

Now the question is when do we use Adobe RGB and sRGB?
The general school of thought is to capture and edit in Adobe RGB, and if necessary, convert to sRGB. Yet, for practical purposes, you might not need to use Adobe RGB in certain situations.

1. If all your images are just to be shown on the web or to be displayed on the computer, Adobe RGB becomes an extra unecessary step. What you see on the web is limited by monitors. sRGB is a color space based on typical monitors. Thus, if you want colors to be accurately represented, you would need them to be in sRGB. If ever you try to display an Adobe RGB image on the web, you will notice that the colors are very much off.

2. If you are not overly critical about color and will only be printing with Minilabs, then it might be practical to just work within the sRGB color space. Most minilabs are sRGB by default and cannot handle Adobe RGB images. If you try printing an adobe rgb image you will also end up with colors that are off as they will be interpreted as sRGB images.

Let's take a look at the colorspace of a Noritsu Printer, probably the most common among minilab printers.

http://louieaguinaldo.weebly.com/uploads/5/0/8/3/5083585/7362128.jpg

The green diagram represents the range of colors a Noritsu Printer is capable of printing on Kodak Royal Silk paper. Take note that it is much smaller than the sRGB color space. Notice also that hardly any uniquely Adobe RGB colors are encompassed by the Noritsu's effective color range. Thus using Adobe RGB for a minilab print would in effect be useless as the color advantage cannot be utilized.

Take note also that since the Noritsu's color gamut is smaller than the sRGB color range, that means that there are many colors that can be captured and viewed on the monitor but cannot be printed. What happens is that the internal color management system of the printer finds a substitute color for these out of gamut colors. This is one important thing that we must take note of when printing our images. Some colors are not capable of being printed.

Using Adobe RGB is advantageous if you are printing with CMYK printers and high end photo printers. Let's take a look at the CMYK color space in relation to Adobe RGB and sRGB color spaces.

http://louieaguinaldo.weebly.com/uploads/5/0/8/3/5083585/4867382.jpg

The black diagram represents a standard CMYK color space. In fact, if you check the default color settings in photoshop, the default CMYK color space is what is represented above. Notice that although the CMYk color space is smaller than the sRGB gamut, there are large areas of it that go beyond the color range of sRGB. Yet, the entire CMYK gamut is well within the Adobe RGB range. Thus, when sending an image to be printed via CMYK you can take good advantage of the wider Adobe RGB color space.
If you only used sRGB in capturing and editing, then it would have been a waste since there is so much more color that you could have utilized and actually printed.

Although minilabs cannot take advantage of the wider color range of Adobe RGB, professional labs that use Professional printers can do so. Let's take a look at Kodak's top-of-the-line RP 50 LED printer.

http://louieaguinaldo.weebly.com/uploads/5/0/8/3/5083585/8094324.jpg


The blue diagram represents the color range that the Kodak Professional RP 50 LED printer is capable of producing on Kodak Professional Brilliance Silk Paper. Notice that the color range is much larger than that of sRGB and even exceeds Adobe RGB in a small area. If you compare it with the earlier image, you will notice that it even has a wider gamut than CMYK. This tells us that such a hi end printer is capable of producing a very wide range of colors. So if you are capturing an image in Adobe RGB, you can actually print more of its colors with such a printer.
Still take note though that it is a smaller color range than Adobe RGB. Thus there are still colors that cannot be printed.

So, if you are critical about colors and plan to have your images sent to the printing press, or printed with high end printers and CMYK printers - stick to Adobe RGB.
If you are just going to display your photos on the web and on your computer, or will just be printing in minilabs, then it might be more practical to stick to sRGB.

One thing that I must caution you though when distributing your photos to clients. Even if you use Adobe RGB, take care not to give such files to people or clients who don't understand it and would not be able to take advantage of it.
For example: don't give a cd of images all in adobe rgb to your relatives. they will most likely view it on the computer or have it printed in a minilab - they will end up with images with colors that are way off than what you intended.
Convert to sRGB before giving to them.

Take special care if dealing with clients. There are clients who will only use the images for the web or printed only through minilabs. If you give them Adobe RGB images, and they are not familiar with it, expect them to complain why the colors of your images are off. Even worse, they just might not hire you again because your images have bad colors.

I actually had a discussion with someone who was relaying to me a problem they had. They hired a photographer to cover an event. The photographer sent them a CD of images. This client was bothered that the images had not very good colors and asked me to comment on them. I then found out that the reason the colors were off was because they had the photos printed in a minilab. The photographer failed to explain to the client that the files are in Adobe RGB and need special handling. I then tried to explain to this person that the photos had good colors but it was in Adobe RGB. Unfortunately, trying to explain something technical to someone who is only interested in results did not help. She said the bottom line was that the photographer should have delivered a ready to use product. Thus, be careful!

Louie,

First rate as always! Now it will be much easier for our forum members to appreciate and understand the different colorspaces and when to use them.

Now if you only let me know what program you are using to get the great graphs. Is it the one from Chromix?

Louie,

First rate as always! Now it will be much easier for our forum members to appreciate and understand the different colorspaces and when to use them.

Now if you only let me know what program you are using to get the great graphs. Is it the one from Chromix?

It is Monaco Gamut Works that comes bundled with their profiling software for printers.

Louie,

Thanks for the explanation. Very helpfull indeed!

Louie, how can one test (or is it proof in PS?) for these kind of printers? does one has to import a profile for a particular printer or the ones built in already in PS sufficient to check it as well as highlight gamut differences?

Louie, how can one test (or is it proof in PS?) for these kind of printers? does one has to import a profile for a particular printer or the ones built in already in PS sufficient to check it as well as highlight gamut differences?

You would need the profile of the particular printer with the specific paper stock you are using to print. If you are using desktop printers, the manufacturer usually has it bundled with your printer driver. Once you install the driver and related software the profiles are usually installed into your system already.

Now for photo labs, you will have to rely on custom made profiles for the lab's printer. Unfortunately, hardly anyone does it here. Not meaning to plug, but DPI has custom made profiles. You can download them from the website http://dpiphotocenter.com

Now, how to use the profiles - You can also check in the same site. There are instructions on how to use the profiles for softproofing. Take note that the way to use the profiles for softproofing differs in the Noritsu machine and the Kodak Professional printer. Instructions for softproofing for both printers can be found at the site. Check under the resource library section.

Softproofing is very useful as it allows you to see the limitations of the printer/paper in relation to the colors of your image. You will be able to see how the out of gamut colors will be represented on each particular printer/paper you plan to use.

Louie,

Thanks for the info. Another question though, if my understanding is correct. Before I post process my photo, can I softproof it at once and then edit so I can get and see the colors I want using this profile? Is this the right way to do it? Then after softproffing, I still have to convert the image to the printer profile I used in softproofing right?

Louie,

Thanks for the info. Another question though, if my understanding is correct. Before I post process my photo, can I softproof it at once and then edit so I can get and see the colors I want using this profile? Is this the right way to do it? Then after softproffing, I still have to convert the image to the printer profile I used in softproofing right?

Yes, softproofing while editing is a good way to do it. I suggest though making a duplicate copy of the file. If you edit the original to suit the colors for a particular printer, you may later want to use it for another printer and your original colors may have already been compromised.

Now converting the image to the printer profile may or may not be necessary depending on the situation.

1. If you are printing on your own desktop printer, you may not need to convert to the profile. You can configure the color management settings so that it does a conversion to the profile prior to printing. This doesn't affect the file.
2. If you are printing with a hi-end printer in a color managed lab, then usually you don't need to convert to the profile because the lab's system should do the conversion immediately prior to printing.
3. If you are printing with a minilab machine like noritsu, you have two options. One, you can rely on the noritsu's own internal color management system which actually does a decent job. But if you want to be more accurate in terms of color control, you can convert your image to the noritsu profile before sending it to the lab. If the profile is accurate, then the colors of your print should be more faithful to the colors of your original file.
Softproofing settings for noritsu varies though depending on whether you will convert to profile or not.
If you will use the noritsu profile just to softproof and allow noritsu's own color management system to handle the colors - check "preserve color numbers"

If you plan to convert the file to noritsu profile before sending for printing you set the softproofing differently - do not check preserve color numbers, and select a rendering intent - either perceptual or relative colorimetric, and check black point compensation. That way you would see how noritsu would handle the colors once you convert the file to its printer profile

great write up louie! made me rethink my workflow. many thanks!

Louie,
Thank you for clarifying. Wow, lots of things to condsider.

what are the noticeable advantages of working in the aRGB space compared to the sRGB? would the prints show better tonal gradiations?

during editing on a monitor, could we see the difference? or are we just preserving as much flexibility in adjusting the colors, similar to editing in 16 bit rather than 8 bits.

Also if web pics are normally better shown in RGB wouldn't that mean that most monitors would NOT be able to show these extra colors anyway?

what are the noticeable advantages of working in the aRGB space compared to the sRGB? would the prints show better tonal gradiations?

during editing on a monitor, could we see the difference? or are we just preserving as much flexibility in adjusting the colors, similar to editing in 16 bit rather than 8 bits.

Also if web pics are normally better shown in RGB wouldn't that mean that most monitors would NOT be able to show these extra colors anyway?


Why don't you use the Assign Profile in Photoshop to see the differences? I doubt you would see better tonal gradations. Can you see differences between 16 bit and 8 bit? I surely can't (but then again I don't have the best eyes). But I'm almost certain you will see the change in color, what a wide color space can provide over a small color space. But whether you can print all those colors or not is a different story.

what about the fuji labs? Which professional labs, aside from DPI, can print in adobe rgb?

Thanks Louie for giving us the lowdown of the different colorspaces.
Very informative indeed! :)

Since most of you shoot for print, are your cameras set using AdobeRGB or sRGB?

i shoot mostly on sRGB... even if majority of the pros that ive talked to tells me to use aRGB:) . seems to be flatter to me.. sorry i dont really PP my photos (i dont now how!!! hahahaaha)

Adobe RGB my friend.

Moved this thread to the proper category.

if your shooting jpegs.. not RAW...

when do you convert your photos to SRGB (for printing)

after editing (levels, curves hue/saturation?)
or before any editing work?

what are the pro's and con's?

can i still benefit from adobeRGB if im shooting jpegs?

So, if you are critical about colors and plan to have your images sent to the printing press, or printed with high end printers and CMYK printers - stick to Adobe RGB.
If you are just going to display your photos on the web and on your computer, or will just be printing in minilabs, then it might be more practical to stick to sRGB.

One thing that I must caution you though when distributing your photos to clients. Even if you use Adobe RGB, take care not to give such files to people or clients who don't understand it and would not be able to take advantage of it.
For example: don't give a cd of images all in adobe rgb to your relatives. they will most likely view it on the computer or have it printed in a minilab - they will end up with images with colors that are way off than what you intended.
Convert to sRGB before giving to them.

Take special care if dealing with clients. There are clients who will only use the images for the web or printed only through minilabs. If you give them Adobe RGB images, and they are not familiar with it, expect them to complain why the colors of your images are off. Even worse, they just might not hire you again because your images have bad colors.

I actually had a discussion with someone who was relaying to me a problem they had. They hired a photographer to cover an event. The photographer sent them a CD of images. This client was bothered that the images had not very good colors and asked me to comment on them. I then found out that the reason the colors were off was because they had the photos printed in a minilab. The photographer failed to explain to the client that the files are in Adobe RGB and need special handling. I then tried to explain to this person that the photos had good colors but it was in Adobe RGB. Unfortunately, trying to explain something technical to someone who is only interested in results did not help. She said the bottom line was that the photographer should have delivered a ready to use product. Thus, be careful!

This actuallly happened to me. I did post proccessing on some group of photos and had them printed in Fuji labs. The pictures that came out, looked horrible. White colors showed no details at all, sharpness was gone and colors were bleeeeeeding. I asked what happened and they said they had to convert it into jpg format from tiff and convert it into sRGB.

:(

Adobe RGB my friend.

Moved this thread to the proper category.

@ nino

i tried shooting aRGB the entire time i was in HKG... im pretty satisfied with the colors... though you really have to tweak it a bit in PP:) . im sticking with it for now...

Adobe RGB for the wider gamut. :)

Using the same icc settings and paper on an epson large format, i find the printed results from the adobe RGB file reddish, more alive, even the hair seems to have a brown tinge, most portrait subjects do look healthier, too healthy even. almost seem like i should turn down the saturation. Is this the general result of using the wider color space?

This actuallly happened to me. I did post proccessing on some group of photos and had them printed in Fuji labs. The pictures that came out, looked horrible. White colors showed no details at all, sharpness was gone and colors were bleeeeeeding. I asked what happened and they said they had to convert it into jpg format from tiff and convert it into sRGB.

:(

Fuji photo labs use sRGB. Thus adobe RGB is converted to sRGB and it usually looks washed out.

interesting read about sRGB.......



3. Use the sRGB color space
All the silly arguing over capture spaces is over. And even though the Adobe RGB space is a better space, sRGB rules the portrait world and here's why it's the right choice for this type of workflow:
(for other types of workflow like commercial and fine art, please read this smArticle (http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc029a.htm))
A simple test shot will show you that when you capture an image in the sRGB space and send it to you lab for printing, you will get a print back with plenty of lush, rich and accurate color. But if you captured that SAME image with your camera set to the Adobe RGB space and use Photoshop to convert the file into the sRGB space and send it to your lab, you will discover your color is not as good and it took you an additional 50% of workflow time to submit the file. The Adobe RGB space is for commercial, high end inkjet, and editorial workflow - not for portrait and wedding workflow. Any pro lab worth it's salt will instruct you to submit sRGB if you care about color.
Even though sRGB is not a perfect color space, it really is the right choice for this type of workflow. Why? Well, besides sRGB being the "default" input space for your labs' printers, your monitor is sRGB not Adobe RGB. So when you shoot in the sRGB space, and you tell Photoshop to work in sRGB (as outlined below) you are seeing all the pixels that you captured in their original space. If you were to capture in Adobe RGB, and set Photoshop to open the file in the Adobe RGB space, your monitor may not be able to "see" all the colors you recorded because your monitor's space is limited to sRGB. This is called "clipping" and causes big problems to the commercial photographers because tools like Leaf backs and scanned color trans films can easily record colors natively in spaces even greater than Adobe RGB, yet we can see only sRGB colors on the monitor. This means that we are working with pixels we cannot see properly on the monitor, but when we print them (with proper color management) on a high-end inkjet printer set to commercial standards we can we see all the colors perfectly.
Why? Because monitors, except for some $7000 ones, are only sRGB. Whew!
We suggest you avoid the Adobe RGB workflow unless you're a commercial or editorial shooter. There's more than enough color in the sRGB space to produce marvelous wedding, portrait and seniors prints through the Frontier workflow and the pro Kodak (DP2) workflow alike. Speaking of prints, guess what color space your lab wants? sRGB. Yep! Just ask them what they prefer. Some high quality labs are just not accepting files unless they're in sRGB and I support them 100%. sRGB is the right space to submit files to a pro lab for printing. Take it from a guy who runs a $250,000 Frontier 570 printer - me - don't use Adobe RGB for this type of workflow. Here's the truth about the whole sRGB vs. Adobe RGB (http://www.shootsmarter.com/infocenter/wc025.html) situation.

so what do the experts have to say about what manuel shared in his post? almost wants me to just go back to using instamatics :p

LOL! I have Andrew Rodney's book on Color Management. It makes just a strong a case for using Adobe RGB instead of sRGB :D

But at least what Manuel cited in his post was qualified. Yes, it is only high end printers that can fully take advantage of the Adobe RGB. However, some wedding photographers here in Manila do have their images printed at DPI. You have to use Adobe RGB to fully take advantage of DPI Kodak LED printer. We all have different workflow options :D

interesting read about sRGB.......

Any pro lab worth it's salt will instruct you to submit sRGB if you care about color.
Even though sRGB is not a perfect color space, it really is the right choice for this type of workflow. Why? Well, besides sRGB being the "default" input space for your labs' printers, your monitor is sRGB not Adobe RGB. .........Speaking of prints, guess what color space your lab wants? sRGB. Yep! Just ask them what they prefer. Some high quality labs are just not accepting files unless they're in sRGB and I support them 100%. sRGB is the right space to submit files to a pro lab for printing.


As i mentioned in the original posting, its better to work on sRGB if you will be printing in labs that can't handle Adobe RGB. True, most labs can only handle sRGB files. Mini-labs are like that. If you will be printing in such labs, I agree, work on sRGB, its more practical. I beg to differ though with your statement "Any pro lab worth it's salt will instruct you to submit sRGB if you care about color." It can be questioned, if that lab can't handle anything more than sRGB, is it really a Pro Lab? And may I add to that, if you care about color - then go to a lab that can handle a wider color gamut than sRGB. All the industry leading color management experts advocate the Adobe RGB color space. And the high end Professional Printing Machines have color spaces that can accomodate way beyond sRGB, that's why it can accomodate and benefit from Adobe RGB.

Comparing sRGB to Adobe RGB can be likened to two images created - one using a box of 48 colored crayons (sRGB) and one using a box of 64 colored crayons (Adobe RGB) - the image created with the 64 colored crayons will have the advantage of more colors to work with. Now if you are happy with capturing and outputting colors with 48 crayons then good for you. But there are those who are more critical about color and would prefer to use 64 crayons.

As i mentioned in the original posting, its better to work on sRGB if you will be printing in labs that can't handle Adobe RGB. True, most labs can only handle sRGB files. Mini-labs are like that. If you will be printing in such labs, I agree, work on sRGB, its more practical. I beg to differ though with your statement "Any pro lab worth it's salt will instruct you to submit sRGB if you care about color." It can be questioned, if that lab can't handle anything more than sRGB, is it really a Pro Lab? And may I add to that, if you care about color - then go to a lab that can handle a wider color gamut than sRGB. All the industry leading color management experts advocate the Adobe RGB color space. And the high end Professional Printing Machines have color spaces that can accomodate way beyond sRGB, that's why it can accomodate and benefit from Adobe RGB.

Comparing sRGB to Adobe RGB can be likened to two images created - one using a box of 48 colored crayons (sRGB) and one using a box of 64 colored crayons (Adobe RGB) - the image created with the 64 colored crayons will have the advantage of more colors to work with. Now if you are happy with capturing and outputting colors with 48 crayons then good for you. But there are those who are more critical about color and would prefer to use 64 crayons.


Yes sir I fully agree with your statement . I think the author is reffering to wedding/portraiture workflow to use sRGB and he also mentioned for commercial shoot to use Adobe RGB. Now since most of as are not that pro yet to spent money to go to pro lab for printing , then shooting with sRGB seems to be practical. How many of us use pro lab for printing?

Just my 2 cents:) .....

True. But one argument for using Adobe RGB is that it is always easy to get the gamut of sRGB from Adobe RGB. It's impossible to get the gamut of Adobe RGB from a file that was shot as sRGB.

Another argument for shooting Adobe RGB is that in the event commercial printers that can take better advantage of Adobe RGB become available in the future.

Besides, you don't have to be a pro to use Adobe RGB. I have a lot of personal shots that I had printed at DPI. Your files have to be in Adobe RGB to take full advantage of the color gamut of their DPI's printer.

Weddings and portraiture? A lot of wedding photographers and studios have their images printed at DPI - especially images destined for a digital storybook.

Different strokes for different folks. :D

But the choice of using Adobe RGB or sRGB is rendered moot if you shoot in RAW. You can always make your choice after you shoot during RAW conversion. :D

ok... go menu... now, switch back from srgb to argb... hahaha!!! good thread.

Now we all know that Adobe RGB is better, most if not all minilabs can only handle sRGB. Should we convert to sRGB before sending to the minilabs, theoretically, it shouldn't be necessary, but in the real world, what are your experiences.

How about the "prolabs" (imageworks,Fans, JT, DPi, Studio 58)? What are your experiences with them? Which is better sending them aRGB or sRGB, in the real world practice? I have heard of needing to send sRGB only since some of them converts aRGB badly.

Most noticable in the blown out highlights.

Though I agree with the merits of ARGB, for me, it's not worth the added complexity in my workflow.

This is a good question thrown out by Jun Lee. I am not even sure if some of the machines used by the labs even accept tagged profiles in the file. I thought I read somewhere that the Fuji Frontiers don't recognize input profiles I don't know if this is true or not. I also hope someone like Edwin Hermoso of Kodak jumps on this thread to answer correctly if Noritsu machines do or do not accept input proflies.

If these machines don't accept input profiles then it would be best to get one of their ICC proflies (if they have any. DPI does for sure). Convert to the icc profile and then save your file wthout embedding the profile.

Now we all know that Adobe RGB is better, most if not all minilabs can only handle sRGB. Should we convert to sRGB before sending to the minilabs, theoretically, it shouldn't be necessary, but in the real world, what are your experiences.

How about the "prolabs" (imageworks,Fans, JT, DPi, Studio 58)? What are your experiences with them? Which is better sending them aRGB or sRGB, in the real world practice? I have heard of needing to send sRGB only since some of them converts aRGB badly.

Most noticable in the blown out highlights.

Now we all know that Adobe RGB is better, most if not all minilabs can only handle sRGB. Should we convert to sRGB before sending to the minilabs, theoretically, it shouldn't be necessary, but in the real world, what are your experiences.

How about the "prolabs" (imageworks,Fans, JT, DPi, Studio 58)? What are your experiences with them? Which is better sending them aRGB or sRGB, in the real world practice? I have heard of needing to send sRGB only since some of them converts aRGB badly.

Most noticable in the blown out highlights.

Yes, if you send photos to minilabs, convert to sRGB. Otherwise, you will end up with prints whose colors are off. Minilab machines such as Noritsus do not read embedded profiles, they just read files as generic sRGB. Thus, if you submit a file in Adobe RGB, it will read it as sRGB. To give you an idea how that would look, in Photoshop, take your Adobe RGB file and Assign the sRGB profile.

The only other option rather than sending it as sRGB to a minilab is to send a file converted to the profile of the minilab printer. Convert your image to the profile of the printer/paper in photoshop before sending it to the printer. Though the minilab printer system cannot recognize the embedded printer profile, the file itself has already been converted such that if the machine reads it as sRGB it will be able to take full advantage of the profile conversion.

Now things are different for professional lab printer systems that can read various RGB profiles. In such situations, just send your Adobe RGB files, the conversion to the appropriate printer/paper profiles will usually be done within the printer system immediately prior to printing.

My biggest problem is what Andrew Rodney describes in his book as 'mystery meat'. :D These are images without an embedded profile that Photoshop usually flags with a warning when you open the image.

Usually its a no brainer when the image is in sRGB and you are using Adobe RGB as a working space. It doesn't make sense to convert the sRGB to Adobe RGB.

I talked to Louie about what to do with 'mystery meat' and he told me that the image would most probably have be in sRGB. So I've been simply assigning a generic sRGB profiles whenever I open files without embedded profiles.

But from what I heard, not all "pro" labs converts it properly. Some says the highlights gets lost.

But from what I heard, not all "pro" labs converts it properly. Some says the highlights gets lost.

True. Most photo lab attendants don't even know what profile theyre using. Good thing somebody mentioned that Fuji is using sRGB because one time when I asked, the attendant just gave me a what-are-you-talking-about look and didn't answer my question. I proceeded with the printing anyways and was thankful that the prints were all good. I shoot with sRGB, btw.

But if no fuji is nearby, what other labs (with specific branches) that you guys can recommend? I have had bad experiences with Kameraworld Festival Mall and Greenbelt branches when my prints came out with washed out highlights and lost details. It didn't bother before since I seldom have my photos printed and I wasn't particular about which photo lab to go to. That is, until I had to submit photos for a photography class assignment and I had them printed at Kameraworld Festival. Was I disappointed to see the prints! :( There were lost details so I told them to process them again as they didn't look the same as in the monitor. They did and the prints turned out better than the first batch. The 2nd time I needed prints asap, nearest lab to my office was Kameraworld Greenbelt and when the prints turned out bad, I didn't have time anymore to argue with them nor ask them to re-process the prints. :(

But from what I heard, not all "pro" labs converts it properly. Some says the highlights gets lost.

Sad to say that some "pro" labs don't even convert at all. They don't have ICC profiles to begin with so there's nothing to convert to. Thus, the nuances of how the printer prints tones and colors is not taken into consideration upon printing.

Thanks, Louie. Those ICC profiles you have are really quite accurate, by the way, judging from some test prints from my favorite Noritsu minilab.

I recently noticed this when choosing rendering intents. My highlights are most likely to get blown out if I choose the Perceptual rendering intent. Which why I tend to favor using the Relative Colorimetric rendering intent.

But from what I heard, not all "pro" labs converts it properly. Some says the highlights gets lost.

If you shoots in sRGB and submit it to a printing press, what will happen to your photos if the press wil convert it to CMYK?

@ Mike

Part of the color range of CMYK will be out of gamut when converting from sRGB.

@ jo

Thank your sir, but what would you recommend. We shoot for school annual and we usually print at kodak for the hard copy of the students and submit a softcopy to the printing press so what would suggest us to use sRGB or Adobe RGB?

@ Mike

Logically, it is possible to get the smaller gamut of sRGB from Adobe RGB. But the reverse is impossible even if we were to convert sRGB to Adobe RGB. You could convert the file. But there would be no real gain in gamut.

You could edit the file while it is in Adobe RGB. Submit the Adobe RGB file to press. Convert the same file to sRGB, save a copy of it and use that for one hour lab printing.

Thank you sir Jo Avila

@ Mike

Logically, it is possible to get the smaller gamut of sRGB from Adobe RGB. But the reverse is impossible even if we were to convert sRGB to Adobe RGB. You could convert the file. But there would be no real gain in gamut.

You could edit the file while it is in Adobe RGB. Submit the Adobe RGB file to press. Convert the same file to sRGB, save a copy of it and use that for one hour lab printing.
so it's better to shoot and edit as Adobe RGB coz you can at least convert it to sRGB when needed? like posting on the web and minilab printing?

@ Jonathan

There are those who don't like using Adobe RGB. They also have valid reasons for not using Adobe RGB.

But Adobe RGB does offer flexibility over sRGB given certain applications and task.

This is a very good thread. I didn't even know the differences. However, can you help me with this. With my D70s, when I set my DSLR to sRGB, shooting RAW, I cant open it with the CS2. However, if I set it to Adobe RGB, I can open it with the CS2.

If the gamut of colors under sRGB is less than the latter, why can't I open my pics shot in sRGB with CS2?

i heard online that if not used correctly, adobe rgb might make your printed pictures look dull because labs dont normally use adobe rgb because srgb is more common... is this true?

@ John

I don't know why that happens with the D70s.

@ TMO

Yup. The machines of one hour labs do not recognize embedded color profiles. Adobe RGB will not print well if sent to a one hour lab. You will first have to convert your file to sRGB before sending it to the one hour lab.

a very informative thread! thanks to Mr. Aguinaldo for starting the thread. i was actualy about to research Adobe RBG VS sRBG. coz when i saw that in my camera, I was actually wondering what the differences are. didn't gamble on shoot/ use something i am not familiar with.. well, now i know. thanks! :)

My monitor - sRGB.
The printing lab I use uses sRGB.
Therefore, it makes sense that I use sRGB with my DSLR and Photoshop.:)

[quote=johnmartinvillanueva]However, can you help me with this. With my D70s, when I set my DSLR to sRGB, shooting RAW, I cant open it with the CS2. However, if I set it to Adobe RGB, I can open it with the CS2.
quote]

do you have the camera raw plug in for adobe?

@ Regie

Yes, your monitor may only be able to show the gamut of sRGB.

But shooting in sRGB (I assume you shoot in JPEGs because this discussion would be partially moot if you shoot in RAW) does give you less flexibility in the long run.

What happens if you bring your files to some place other than a one hour lab?

Digital labs like DPI can output prints whose color gamut is partially out of gamut of sRGB.

Stuff for the press needs to be CMYK - whose color gamut exceeds that of sRGB in some areas.

Desktop inkjet printers like the Canon Pro9000 can take almost full advantage of the gamut of Adobe RGB.

Using sRGB may simplify things. But its easy to convert Adobe RGB to sRGB. Its impossible to get the gamut of Adobe RGB if you convert from sRGB. Adobe RGB does offer a bit more flexibility in the long run compared to the smaller gamut of sRGB.

[quote=johnmartinvillanueva]However, can you help me with this. With my D70s, when I set my DSLR to sRGB, shooting RAW, I cant open it with the CS2. However, if I set it to Adobe RGB, I can open it with the CS2.
quote]

do you have the camera raw plug in for adobe?

Hmmm...not sure of that. To make it simple, I convert raw to Tiff then have it printed. I have already the Capture NX so I use it more often than CS2. Both SRGB and Adobe RGB works well. Thanks

@ John

Try downloading the Adobe Camera Raw Converter plug-in version 3.7 from www.adobe.com

This is the latest version and its for free.

But the choice of using Adobe RGB or sRGB is rendered moot if you shoot in RAW. You can always make your choice after you shoot during RAW conversion. :D

Thanks for posting this...now my confusion is gone.

Thanks for posting this...now my confusion is gone.

All solutions (a.k.a. No problem :D).

There is one little trick though that I sometimes do when shooting RAW+JPEG.

I will often shoot RAW+JPEG (Small with the greatest amount of file compression) if the client wishes to have thumbnails for quick viewing.

I shoot in RAW+JPEG so that I won't have to convert my RAW shots just for thumbnail purposes. But, the color space setting of my camera is set to sRGB whenever I shoot RAW+JPEG. Chances are the client will be viewing the JPEG thumbnails on a program or application that does not recognize color profiles. A color profile of sRGB is the safest one to use in this scenario. I will then set the color space to Adobe RGB when I convert my RAW files.

When you view your RAW+JPEG files in Adobe Bridge the RAW and JPEG files alternate with each other. How do I quickly separate the RAW from the JPEG files in Adobe Bridge? I go to View>Sort>by File Size.

I then quickly select all the JPEG shots and assign a color label to them. I do the same to the RAW files but use a different color label. This makes it easy to separate one file from the other if the need for it arises.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

@ TMO

Yup. The machines of one hour labs do not recognize embedded color profiles. Adobe RGB will not print well if sent to a one hour lab. You will first have to convert your file to sRGB before sending it to the one hour lab.

This bit of advice seems wrong in hindsight.

Using sRGB is safe as far as viewing them only on the lab technician's display monitor. But that doesn't necessarily translate into producing a good print.

The better option (again in hindsight) would be to convert the images to the color profile of the machine and the paper that will be used prior to sending them to the lab for printing.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

great lou!

just the info i was looking for! perfect! :Grin:

very informative thread....

wow! thanks for bringing this up. (i was just about to start my research on their differences)

a question though, do CRT monitors recognize adobeRGB? im using an old 17in CRT monitor and was wondering if it sees the adobeRGB. =)

cause if my monitor cannot see it, will i be better off

a.) just using sRGB
b.) use AdobeRGB and convert to sRGB (just incase i do get a monitor that can handle aRGB)

wow! thanks for bringing this up. (i was just about to start my research on their differences)

a question though, do CRT monitors recognize adobeRGB? im using an old 17in CRT monitor and was wondering if it sees the adobeRGB. =)

cause if my monitor cannot see it, will i be better off

a.) just using sRGB
b.) use AdobeRGB and convert to sRGB (just incase i do get a monitor that can handle aRGB)

Monitors don't "see" color spaces :D

Your question should be "Can my old 17" CRT handle the color gamut of the Adobe RGB color space.?"

My answer is no.

BTW, how old is your CRT? Generally, CRT monitors older than 3 years old cannot be properly calibrated which in turn affects its color profiling.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Thank you sir Jo. I think it's about ten years old. :D

Thank you sir Jo. I think it's about ten years old. :D

10 years old? I think it's time to change it. I had a CRT monitor which as 5 years old. It wasn't stable no matter how long I let it warm up. In fact, its colors would shift wildly the longer I used it. It threw it away soon afterwards.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Hi Jo,

Im actually wondering if the new "pro" monitors can display the whole aRGB gamut? I saw the diff with Jiggie's Apple Display and the Samsung 23" Monitor which, with that observation along with what a broadcast engineer from ABS-CBN told me, led me to research on display technology (i thought they were all the same, apparently not!!)

and aside from DPI, what other lab can do aRGB prints?

This has been an informative thread, and to think, back in 2006 when i had my first DSLR i couldnt care less what aRGB and sRGB was for.."Adobe sounds more correct so lets set it there" :D:D..

Hi Jo,

Im actually wondering if the new "pro" monitors can display the whole aRGB gamut? I saw the diff with Jiggie's Apple Display and the Samsung 23" Monitor which, with that observation along with what a broadcast engineer from ABS-CBN told me, led me to research on display technology (i thought they were all the same, apparently not!!)

and aside from DPI, what other lab can do aRGB prints?

This has been an informative thread, and to think, back in 2006 when i had my first DSLR i couldnt care less what aRGB and sRGB was for.."Adobe sounds more correct so lets set it there" :D:D..

The color gamut of most photo lab machines is typically smaller compared to Adobe RGB.

I don't think that DPI can produce prints that encompass the whole color gamut range of Adobe RGB.

But DPI knows how to handle images in the color space of Adobe RGB and gamut map it to the destination color space for the printer and paper.

That's one big argument to use sRGB. It's the least common denominator color space. Most monitors can handle the gamut of sRGB.

The problem with using Adobe RGB as the color space for your photos is that some adjustments that affect the file MIGHT not be visible on the monitor.

Which leads me to a question: "When you guys are concerned about Adobe RGB, are you concerned with using it as the color space for your photos or as the color workspace you will use in Photoshop?"

Those are two different things :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

The problem with using Adobe RGB as the color space for your photos is that some adjustments that affect the file MIGHT not be visible on the monitor.

Which leads me to a question: "When you guys are concerned about Adobe RGB, are you concerned with using it as the color space for your photos or as the color workspace you will use in Photoshop?"

Those are two different things :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Aha!! I think im now confused...let me see if get this right...thinking.:Thinking::Thinking:..now im more confused :D ....kindly correct me if im wrong..the way i understand it, when i convert from a raw file, working with AdobeRGB color space in Photoshop allows me the widest color range (assuming i have the monitor that can display it) before i decide the output whether it is for inkjet print, lab print or web ( all of which have narrower gamuts right?)..

I actually have another question? what is the printing service of Studio 58 called Lysonic and Lamda durst? How are they different from others?

Hi Jo,
I find it interesting why is ProPhoto RGB not being mentioned. Considering it is the widest and the future is coming.
Is it because the title is Adobe RGB vs. sRGB and it will be off topic?

I was able to see the Camera to Print tutorial by Jeff Schewe wherein he showed the visual difference of the two. Subtle but still. Do you believe on the practical use of ProPhoto RGB?

Thanks!

For archiving and future-proofing, I would agree that working in 16-bit and in ProPhoto RGB would be the best way to go as you'll be dumping some out-of-gamut colors with aRGB/sRGB, but the biggest x-factor will be when will monitors and printers be able to utilize this color space?

It'd also really depend if you're working and delivering in 16-bit all the time. JPEGs and the current line of CMYK printers can't support ProPhoto yet, not to mention monitors that can display the full aRGB gamut is still few and expensive, let alone ProPhoto RGB, so if the monitor can't render the colors of that ProPhoto, what are we working on?

Hi David,
Nice rebut :)

to discuss...
It is the same case today anyway, as you have mentioned some of our monitors and printers are not there yet for aRGB. But why save on aRGB when you can save in the widest then convert to target media?

The future is coming. We know cannot go back to Prophoto from aRGB but we can always go the other way. I would like to think that my edited files are ready when it happens :)

matter of preference really. Just thinking out loud :)

Yup, precisely my point - future proofing. Just like why folks prefer RAW or save in DNG etc... Better to have the excess than not to have it when tech catches up.

Aha!! I think im now confused...let me see if get this right...thinking.:Thinking::Thinking:..now im more confused :D ....kindly correct me if im wrong..the way i understand it, when i convert from a raw file, working with AdobeRGB color space in Photoshop allows me the widest color range (assuming i have the monitor that can display it) before i decide the output whether it is for inkjet print, lab print or web ( all of which have narrower gamuts right?)..

I actually have another question? what is the printing service of Studio 58 called Lysonic and Lamda durst? How are they different from others?


You have to specify which color space (i.e. Adobe RGB, sRGB, etc.) to encode your digital files when you do your RAW conversion. Specifying the colorspace will then allow RGB values to be created that will describe how the colors of the image should appear in the color space.

Color workspace can be thought of as the box of crayons that Photoshop will use to describe the colors of your image. Color workspaces must always be device independent color space (i.e. Adobe RGB, sRGB, etc.). Which is why it's always a bad idea to use the display color profile (the color profile of your computer display) as a color workspace. The color profiles or color spaces that we use the describe the color behavior of computer displays, combinations of printers, inks, papers are all device specific or device dependent.

This is the great thing about the color workspace. It never has to match the color space of your images. For example, my color workspace could be sRGB and I could have an image that has the color space of Adobe RGB. I will still see the colors of the image accurately in Photoshop even if its color profile DOES NOT match the color workspace (Photoshop actually has an automatic feature to accomplish this that's always working in the background).

This is why I am trying to draw the distinction of using Adobe RGB as the color space for the image or as your color workspace when you post process in Photoshop :D

Lysonic refers to the inks Studio 58 uses for their large format inkjet printers.

http://www.lyson.com/

Durst Lambda refers to the laser-based machine that Studio 58 uses to produce some of its photo lab prints.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/printers/durst/durstLambda.jhtml

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Hi David,
Nice rebut :)

to discuss...
It is the same case today anyway, as you have mentioned some of our monitors and printers are not there yet for aRGB. But why save on aRGB when you can save in the widest then convert to target media?

The future is coming. We know cannot go back to Prophoto from aRGB but we can always go the other way. I would like to think that my edited files are ready when it happens :)

matter of preference really. Just thinking out loud :)

The only problem that we have encountered with using images in ProPhoto (16-bit) is that color banding occurs when they get converted for use in 8-bit.

I think it was Jay Jallorina who first brought up this observation during a Canon Pixma launch event at the old Bella Luce HQ.

Luckily, we had someone from Datacolor HK to explained to us why the color banding was occurring.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Hi Sir Jo! So it is then right that I use aRGB as my colorspace both in my camera and in PS to preserve color details?
Now I'm wondering if you know what does the "Embed ICC color profile during transfer" mean in my Nikon Transfer application. I think by defualt this is disabled, but I checked/enabled it for my use but doesn't know what this means...

Thanks!

The only problem that we have encountered with using images in ProPhoto (16-bit) is that color banding occurs when they get converted for use in 8-bit.

I think it was Jay Jallorina who first brought up this observation during a Canon Pixma launch event at the old Bella Luce HQ.

Luckily, we had someone from Datacolor HK to explained to us why the color banding was occurring.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Yup, there's that danger when converting to a smaller bit depth specially if the image is of wide gamut - 8bit cannot represent. Larger gamut does require greater bit depth so we still get small enough steps between the colors to prevent banding.

I understand that it is not for all. It is high-end printing.

I guess conversion is not a concern for you anymore. Canon PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II :)

Hi Sir Jo! So it is then right that I use aRGB as my colorspace both in my camera and in PS to preserve color details?
Now I'm wondering if you know what does the "Embed ICC color profile during transfer" mean in my Nikon Transfer application. I think by defualt this is disabled, but I checked/enabled it for my use but doesn't know what this means...

Thanks!

I would choose to embed the ICC profile during transfer. :D

ICC or color profiles give scale and dimension to RGB values.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Yup, there's that danger when converting to a smaller bit depth specially if the image is of wide gamut - 8bit cannot represent. Larger gamut does require greater bit depth so we still get small enough steps between the colors to prevent banding.

I understand that it is not for all. It is high-end printing.

I guess conversion is not a concern for you anymore. Canon PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II :)


Who are you referring to?

I am still using a Canon Pro9000 MkI.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Thank Jo for the very informative response..now i think i understand the distinction of image color space and color workspace..the question in my mind now is whats the advantage/disadvantage on working with images with Adobe RGB color space on Photoshop set to sRGB workspace and vice versa?
In my Photoshop class with Nick T., he told us to set color workspace to AdobeRGB..

Thank Jo for the very informative response..now i think i understand the distinction of image color space and color workspace..the question in my mind now is whats the advantage/disadvantage on working with images with Adobe RGB color space on Photoshop set to sRGB workspace and vice versa?
In my Photoshop class with Nick T., he told us to set color workspace to AdobeRGB..

Wouldn't you rather try to describe the colors of a digital image with a bigger box of crayons (color workspace set to Adobe RGB) instead of a smaller box of crayons (color workspace set to sRGB)?

The only problem that I am encountering right now is that the gamut of my MBP's LCD is smaller than sRGB.

I might soon shift to using sRGB as my color workspace but keep my images in the color space of Adobe RGB.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Thank Jo for the very informative response..now i think i understand the distinction of image color space and color workspace..the question in my mind now is whats the advantage/disadvantage on working with images with Adobe RGB color space on Photoshop set to sRGB workspace and vice versa?
In my Photoshop class with Nick T., he told us to set color workspace to AdobeRGB..

Let's say that your images are in the color space of Adobe RGB but your color workspace is set to sRGB, PS will just try to describe the colors of Adobe RGB within the gamut of sRGB and vice versa.

It's an automatic feature of Photoshop. A real no-brainer (that IMO works best if you've checked all of the warning check boxes for your color management policies in PS under Edit>Color Settings [Shift+Cmd/Ctl+K]). :D

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Wow this is a really interesting thread. I've become both enlightened and really confused at the same time. I'm very much greenhorn when it comes to photography and I take pictures more for memories and documentation rather than for business/profit purposes. Occasionally too I like having prints of my pictures made in shops such as Photoline and Kameraworld. If I were to simply take photos, lend the memory card to the shops and have them print my pictures, would it be better to have the camera settings in sRGB or Adobe RGB? From what I understand from having read the previous 9 pages of this thread the safest solution would probably just to shoot the photos in sRGB? This assumes though that for whatever reason I can't shoot the image in Adobe RGB and just convert the images to sRGB for printing (people already asking for the prints the next day, no time to post-process, etc.)

Another question, if I may sirs: Say I want to get a photo printer for personal use, such as a Canon Selphy, would it be better to shoot straight to sRGB and print, or shoot in Adobe RGB and convert to sRGB? Or is the Canon Selphy more in tune with the Adobe RGB? Or does it even matter?

I'm really confused. I've done some online research and it's just made me more confused. Thanks in advance for the help!

Wow this is a really interesting thread. I've become both enlightened and really confused at the same time. I'm very much greenhorn when it comes to photography and I take pictures more for memories and documentation rather than for business/profit purposes. Occasionally too I like having prints of my pictures made in shops such as Photoline and Kameraworld. If I were to simply take photos, lend the memory card to the shops and have them print my pictures, would it be better to have the camera settings in sRGB or Adobe RGB? From what I understand from having read the previous 9 pages of this thread the safest solution would probably just to shoot the photos in sRGB? This assumes though that for whatever reason I can't shoot the image in Adobe RGB and just convert the images to sRGB for printing (people already asking for the prints the next day, no time to post-process, etc.)

Another question, if I may sirs: Say I want to get a photo printer for personal use, such as a Canon Selphy, would it be better to shoot straight to sRGB and print, or shoot in Adobe RGB and convert to sRGB? Or is the Canon Selphy more in tune with the Adobe RGB? Or does it even matter?

I'm really confused. I've done some online research and it's just made me more confused. Thanks in advance for the help!

Use sRGB as the color space of your images that will be printed at the one hour photo lab.

IMO, it would be better to use Adobe RGB as the color space of your image if you will print them on inkjet.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Use sRGB as the color space of your images that will be printed at the one hour photo lab.

IMO, it would be better to use Adobe RGB as the color space of your image if you will print them on inkjet.

Cheers!

Jo Avila

Thanks for the help sir!

The only problem that we have encountered with using images in ProPhoto (16-bit) is that color banding occurs when they get converted for use in 8-bit.

I think it was Jay Jallorina who first brought up this observation during a Canon Pixma launch event at the old Bella Luce HQ.

Luckily, we had someone from Datacolor HK to explained to us why the color banding was occurring.

Cheers!

Jo Avila


That is correct, some printer drivers are not capable of printing 16 bit so the PD will convert it to 8 bit. Some of the Pro printers (Large format printer) can print up to 12 bit only. but there are PD that can print 16 bit. but I am not sure if those A3 printers can print 16 bit.