I just did a YouTube video on this topic, and saw the same type of behavior. Current web browsers support colour management and will display colours accurately for AdobeRGB if the image is tagged with the colour profile. Otherwise you will get muted images as stated above. Lightroom automatically tags the images with the colour profile when they are exported.
AdobeRGB is larger than the colour gamuts used in commercial print. There are some colours used in commercial print ie some yellows which are not contained within the sRGB colour gamut. If you are printing to an Epson or other photo printer you will be able to print colours that do not exist within the AdobeRGB colour gamut.
ProPhotoRGB will preserve all the colours you can print on a good photo printer. I posted a video on Flickr this week that demonstrates this. While some browsers are adapting AdobeRGB color spaces, not all of them have yet. Most mobile browsers will not adapt to AdobeRGB yet. When shooting in RAW, you preserve all the colors used with in the image. However, if you outsource your printing, most print labs will not support.
CR2 or. NEF files as its too much of a work load to convert correctly. All current browsers support colour management and have done so for a few years. This includes Internet Explorer, Firefox and Chrome. They support not only AdobeRGB but will convert from any colour space as long as the image is tagged with the profile.
Test it. There are just two mobile platforms that support that right now. Take my Samsung Omnia 7 for example. You will have wrong colors no matter you have color managed software behind or not. I don't think iOS even allows apps to color-manage images.
Even Datacolor's SpyderGallery app is not color managed. The web is going mobile faster than ever. If your website where you display images isn't mobile friendly good luck finding a job.
Also: I don't think that is the point. The reason for this post is: It is better to do this VS not do it. End of. So can you guys stop trying to find things to argue about? While Zach is correct that not all browsers, particularly mobile devices do not support sRGB. CM unaware browsers do not convert to sRGB as the article states. They simply present the RGB values in their native space.
Any non-grey build will appear more saturated in a larger colorspace. Hence when a large colorspace file is presented in the smaller color space of a non-CM browser, it appears less saturated.
This is not conversion per-se, but merely presentation in the software's native space. Peter is spot on regarding the extended yellow gamut of the inkjets compared to Adobe The caveat to such a large space is that neighboring levels have a larger visual jump between colur HSV than in a smaller space.
It's stated incorrectly in the article that Adobe offers more colors than sRGB. Numbers of colors are a result of bit depth NOT colorspace.
I often hear authors try to convince their readers that 16 bit has more tonal range than 8 bit, and that too is false. The range is pure white to pure black in both. Same range. Number of levels withing the range is what is different. It is extremely uncommon for me to be publicly critical of an article, but this particular piece is so out of alignment with the truth that I am finding it very difficult to remain calm and positive.
Trying to keep an article simple for the reader is commendable and appreciated. Spreading incorrect information is not however appreciated. As a professional in the fine-art photographic reproduction field since prior to digital, the countless hours of re-education invested to "fix" the misunderstandings resulting from articles like this are burdensome. I personally would rather spend the time getting to understand the photographers creative vision so I can meet their needs, than spending it retraining them so they can get better results from their files.
Many or most of the storybook manufacturers request sRGB, as do many printers for other options and you have to be careful choosing your printer if you opt for aRGB.
What hasn't been discussed are people's preferences for conversion Lee - you hit the nail on the head. How does the conversion process deal with out-of-gamut colors. Lightroom supports two "rendering intents" - relative and absolute - in the print module. You need to learn the difference and use the appropriate one for your prints. However, you should always use ProPhoto in your processing - and there is a very good reason. Most of the adjustments we apply are linear operations, but they can create new colors in the image.
Thus, when you adjust, say, saturation, you are creating new colors in the image and even if the original image was completely sRGB or Adobe RGB , the adjusted image may contain colors outside of those gamuts. OK - that fine. If you are processing in sRGB, then every time you make an adjustment the processor has to render the results back to the restricted space.
Rendering out-of-gamut colors is a nonlinear operation and it can result in undesirable results. However, if you process in ProPhoto which is a huge RGB space , it is very unlikely that your adjustments will create out-of-gamut for ProPhoto colors. So, you should always process images in ProPhoto. Lightroom and PhotoShop print modules will show you out-of-gamut indications for both your monitor and your printer.
You do your final rendering with the full light of this information, and you select the proper rendering algorithm them. Summary: Always use ProPhoto in processing to eliminate nonlinear and uncontrolled by you out-of-gamut renderings between each adjustment. Do out-of-gamut rendering once - in the print module.
Why convert from the native scanner color space to Adobe RGB ? An extra conversion for no reason, especially if and it's quite likely the native scanner color space has a larger gamut in some area compared to Adobe RGB I am a long time follower of this blog, and this is the first comment I have ever posted.
I felt the need. This article is a wonderful, and accurate to within the confines of its content, guide for people who have yet to deal with that overwhelming world called color management what I call color wrangling. Yes, there are more advanced discussions to be had; however, I agree that this was not the place for them.
Zach, it was wonderfully informative. Beginning photographers out there, follow this advice, and you are already x more prepared to face this realm of color conundrums.
As a result of all these issues, I ended up with the following pros and cons list for each color space:. You will face the same question over Color Space in your post-processing.
In fact, if you are shooting in RAW and you should be , this will be where you actually assign the Color Space in the first place. When you take a RAW file, the camera captures all the colors it can and no color profile is assigned. Instead, you do that in Photoshop or Lightroom. When you do so, a dialog box will pop up see below. Now when you save your files as JPEGs or whatever file format you choose, the color space you chose will be used.
Lightroom works differently. You cannot change it. Instead, you choose the Color Space when you export your photos from Lightroom. If you are familiar with Lightroom, you know that it does not actually modify your photos, but stores the changes elsewhere. When it is time to bake your changes into the photo and create a JPEG or some other file type, you go through the export process.
Just right-click and choose Export. When you do, a dialog box will appear with a lot of options see below. One of the options under the File Settings section is Color Space. Just choose the one you want. When you have made all the settings, click Export and Lightroom will create a file. Lightroom will also remember your choice for your next photo.
But with great potential comes greater challenges; working exclusively in Adobe RGB vs. If you import Adobe RGB images into an sRGB work environment, the program will convert the colors accordingly, which is often overlooked by the user. Miss a step and your work will suffer. In terms of popularity, sRGB is far and away the most common color space option. Know the context and you will know which color space is your friend. Again, it depends on support. Although not as common, there are many monitors capable of rendering the Adobe RGB spectrum in full.
So, when editing your photographs , you can expect the vividness and accuracy of colors represented on the screen will translate to print. Granted, if you value consistency in your work, whether viewed on the web or print, sRGB is the safe, dependable option. Shooting in Adobe RGB might look incredible on your camera, but, when uploaded online, the colors are likely to be converted automatically, resulting in a duller, less vibrant image.
Like the RAW vs. JPEG debate, deciding on a color space is about intent. Where do you hope to showcase your photographs if at all? But do the benefits of Adobe RGB outweigh the drawbacks?
In our humble opinion, no. Until support is strengthened, sRGB is far and away the best color space option available to photographers. The color gamut may not be as rich as Adobe RGB, but, to the naked eye, such differences are marginal. Adobe RGB, while powerful, will always add a few extra steps to your workflow. It will always require more post-processing work than sRGB.
It will always present additional challenges to overcome, which can detract from the root of your photographic work. Adobe RGB is also one of the leading causes of substandard prints. Yes, when done right, Adobe RGB can produce better results for print. With Adobe RGB, the colors will not always match what you see on your monitor, effectively reducing the quality of your work.
0コメント