Adobe or sRGB colour?

[Steve]

Hi all,

I just noticed that one of Brian's recent photos is in Adobe colour format. This image:



...anyone have a view on this, any comment Brian, or anyone else, etc?

Is sRGB agreed by one and all to be the correct setting to use?

Steve

[Brian]

Steve

I take it you are reffering to uploaded images.

It's generally accepted that sRGB is the best profile for display on the web, this one must have slipped the net.

For comparison I've uploaded the image in sRGB.

To be honest I can't tell the difference, maybe someone with a more discerning eye will.


Brian

[Steve]

Brian,

It isn't a one off for sure.. as I just looked at the one before that and that is also the same.

How it looks to you will probably depend on your monitor and software settings etc. I wouldn't be surprised if both displayed exactly the same to you there.

According to some of the 'expert advice' that is about on the Web Adobe RGB displays as a much more washed out image to most browsing the Web...and it is said by some of those claiming to be experts in the colour field that it can make a photographer look poor.. some sites show examples side by side etc.

Steve

[Brian]

Steve

I have checked my camera the colour space is sRGB, I checked CS3, the working space is sRGB, so something is converting the camera image between the camera and CS3.

After having a think about it I know what the problem is, I had been using RAW in the camera to take some astro pics and the colour space was set to RGB in Adobe Camera Raw. So when I opened the images up in CS3 they had been converted to RGB.

In Adobe's Creative Suite 3 you can synchronise all the applications to use the same colour profile through Adobe Bridge, but if like me you only have Photoshop CS3 you will have to synchronise the colour space manually in Camera Raw and CS3.

Hopefully that problem is sorted, and will help anyone else with CS3.

Brian

[Steve]

Brian,

I hated paying out for CS3 let alone the whole creative 'give me all your money now' package... ..so like you I use CS3 as a standalone. I loath Adobe pricing, I really do...

I'm using Paint Shop Pro for most things as I like it and it seems a well spent £49 etc... I prefered it even more when it was from Jasc though, before Corel took it over. Mine is setup so it warns if you try and work with an Adobe RGB file, and offers to instantly convert it.

My CS3 upgrade has arrived now and I will install it at some point..forcing myself to use over priced bloatware may be harder though....even if it does do a lot and has become some sort of standard...

Steve

[Brian]

Steve

I just found out if Camera Raw opens up a file with a different profile to the one that's set in the software an asterisk on a yellow background appears in the image, been wondering what that was for.

I still use PSP 8 myself, although when I work with RAW images, CS3 is very good when you use the correct profile.

Check out the Adobe Bridge Home website, their is a wealth of info regarding CS3, and quite a few free downloads including some neat actions.

Brian

[Kenfuj1]

Can I ask why you choose to use sRGB over Adobe RGB

[Brian]

Can I ask why you choose to use sRGB over Adobe RGB

First of all, Internet Explorer doesn't support ICC profiles so uploading RGB images is pointless as they may not display as they would in Photoshop.

sRGB is the industry standard used by Microsoft and other companies, also a lot of labs only work with sRGB.

If you want to, or your printer supports hi-res printing an ICC profile such as Adobe RGB or Pro Photo would be preffered.

Brian

[Steve]

First of all, Internet Explorer doesn't support ICC profiles so uploading RGB images is pointless as they may not display as they would in Photoshop.

Quite. Also of course the same applies to thousands of other ways of viewing the Internet... with everything up to and including TV viewing it is said that Adobe RGB is likely to give a poor result. More and more viewing by everything from TVs to phones is now taking place.

I view the Internet and ukexpert via TV at times myself, and it looks great that way I have to say. I use a PS3 for that...and I like the way I can zoom in on items and see/read them across the room etc.

sRGB is the industry standard used by Microsoft and other companies, also a lot of labs only work with sRGB.

Yes, I've noticed instructions to only submit in sRGB etc.

I'm never totally sure about Microsoft and Adobe and so on attempting to set standards mind you.. for instance the new standard for High Definition movies seems to be the great Blu-ray Disc system.. but Microsoft are championing the inferior HD DVD as their standard.. and their monopoly position may even win through, who knows.

If you want to, or your printer supports hi-res printing an ICC profile such as Adobe RGB or Pro Photo would be preferred.

Some folks do use Adobe RGB and then have a workflow where they also have a copy in sRGB and so on.. it means double storage space and double working though...and is a sure way to use up plenty of time that could have been devoted to other things, like taking photos perhaps.

At the end of the day we all seem to have to use sRGB for online material..so it is perhaps a non subject for most folks. Most photos are of course simply taken and uploaded in sRGB... as simple as you can get, and it works fine and wastes no time.

Steve

[Brian]

Some folks do use Adobe RGB and then have a workflow where they also have a copy in sRGB and so on..

Steve

The one advantage of shooting in RAW is if you have a special image you would like printing off you can convert it to whatever colour space you like.

Shooting jpegs set to sRGB and you're stuck with uploading them to the web or sending them to the 1hr photo labs.

If you never print any images off you've no problems, just set the camera to sRGB jpegs and fire away.


Brian

[Steve]

Brian,

I think there are other things that using RAW gives you, like the ability to 'develop' the image yourself. The trade off is time and effort, and for most photos simply shooting and using and uploading and sharing JPG will make sense to most folks I guess.

I haven't seen stats anywhere.. but my guess would be that over 99% of digital photos taken in the UK are sRGB JPG images.

I do like the look of the K10D's RAW button.. so if you are taking an image where you feel RAW may be helpful you can use it for that image with ease. Also it offers both Pentax RAW and Adobe RAW, and my understanding at present is that the better choice is Pentax.

Re that line re printing.. most photograhers in the UK print their photos at times.. and the overwhelming mass of them use sRGB and JPG. That includes me and most folks I know... all taking JPG photos and getting very pleasing prints and enlargements from them etc etc.

All the prize winning photos in the competitions here are sRGB JPGs of course, and so on.

So, we are all using sRGB JPGs at some point... whether we play about beforehand or not.

Steve

[Kenfuj1]

I always save mine as Adobe RGB and have camera set at Adobe sRGB
reason - because it has a better colour range, about 15% more.
If i'm uploading for the web then I convert it to sRGB, you can do the conversion this way but no point doing it the other way round. (if you use "save for web" this does the conversion for you)
Home printing I do very little of nowadays but when I did I had profiles from the paper manufacturers and that gave me the best results.
Where I get my prints done they have their own profile so I use that.
All in all, for me I think i'm better staying with using Adobe RGB
I only keep jpegs on the PC, RAW files are always saved on DVD's as a back up

Ken

[Steve]

Ken,

However you want to do things has to be up to you.

Some obvious comments on what you say there are...

'Better colour range'.. it has exactly the same number of colours as sRGB though of course.

Having to convert everything to another format to use it online and to share it online etc could produce less good results than starting with sRGB perhaps.. it certainly won't produce better.

Save for Web is a way to reduce quality/info.. and it for instance normally takes out EXIF info. Normally we'd never want to have an upload that was done as a 'save for Web' and personally I keep all my images at their best quality not the worst I can get away with... which is how save for Web is often seen I think. Save for Web is ideal for a graphic for a Web site where you want it as small as possible, and that is the sort of thing it is meant for I believe.

I'm surprised you don't print at home. I have an A3+ printer that produces great results, usually much better than the commercial places I've used really.

I backup all my images, and I always suggest everyone does. Backing up only the RAW images would mean a lot of things.. from losing all the work done on an image to when you die all your images almost certainly dying with you.. as who is going to work through years of RAW backups to convert them all again etc.

I'm not against what you are doing in working in Adobe RGB.. if it wasn't peak holiday time I think you'd find a few others here saying they do the same... but it does use up time, as does working in RAW, and usually it will be for no noticable difference in the photos you upload/share/show etc... so most folks don't do it and see no point in it, and it is more for folks with a lot of time perhaps.

I don't like to link to Adobe as I so resent their pricing policies.. but there are said to be big problems with their CS3 product and Save to Web etc so it seems like something I should link to for once... http://www.adobeforums.com/cgi-bin/webx/.3bc41aeb

I know I urged you to get more into things here the other day and you ignored me....but I would do so again. If you get into the community here more and become part of it by attending meets and not just remaining a guest user etc you might have a change of heart on some things.

For instance, sharing quality reduced images and recommending that... save for Web isn't a great idea if you want to share your best photos with friends and relatives all over the World, so they can print them and treasure them and make use of them etc.

Also as our members die and their friends and relatives and photos live on here then being able to see and print their photos in all their glory etc is a great thing I know many here find very rewarding... I sure do... and for instance my Brother's photos here are a wonderful resource etc.

All the best,

Steve

[Brian]

Brian,

I think there are other things that using RAW gives you, like the ability to 'develop' the image yourself. The trade off is time and effort, and for most photos simply shooting and using and uploading and sharing JPG will make sense to most folks I guess.

Steve

I couldn't agree more, I shoot my astro images exclusively in RAW, if I tried shooting them in jpeg their wouldn't be much left to upload. I still have my camera set to sRGB though.

I believe the only difference between sRGB and RGB is that sRGB clips the black and white ends of the colour range producing an image with more saturated colours.


Brian

[lespaul-gibson]

Very interesting to read all this as I was wondering if to change my camera settings to Adobe RGB but after reading all this I'll leave the setting at sRGB and I quite agree with you Steve about the pricing of Adobe.