sRGB vs RGB??

[scott1120]

Which one should I use? I will probably not shoot much raw and post processing will be done with CS2. Does it even make a difference which one I use?

[MRCPix]

RGB has a much wider color range and is better for printing, but if all you are going to do is put them on the computer and look at them on a monitor I would say sRGB would be fine.

[jeffkohn]

"RGB" isn't a color space, you need to be more specific. Adobe RGB? ProPhoto RGB? Adobe RGB is larger than sRGB but not tremendously so. Pro Photo RGB is much larger, and definitely should not be used for 8-bit editing.

If you're primarily shooting JPEG, save yourself some headaches and just stick with sRGB, especially if you're going to be printing at labs that expect sRGB anyway.

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Continuing on Jeff's vein... if you are shooting RAW, then just use Adobe RGB and forget about it. If you print at a lab that expects sRGB, then just convert to that when you need to... as Jeff said.

If you don't know whether or not you need ProPhoto RGB... then you don't need it. Ha ha. No... seriously!

- Wil

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by scott1120

Which one should I use? I will probably not shoot much raw and post processing will be done with CS2. Does it even make a difference which one I use?

Are you taking about your working color space or your camera color space?

[Tapper]

In practical terms, it won't make much difference. Most image editors convert back and forth pretty well. Practically, you should edit in the color space matching your output device most closely. For outputting images to the web and most modern devices (like printers, monitors, etc.), sRGB is closest to your output space.

In the long run, it makes little sense to edit in a gamut larger than your output devices can represent. Although you increase precision by working in aRGB, you may actually be reducing your accuracy, as you force your rendering algorithm to rationalize between gamuts.

I'd be more concerned about profiling your monitor and printer.

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by Tapper

In practical terms, it won't make much difference. Most image editors convert back and forth pretty well. Practically, you should edit in the color space matching your output device most closely. For outputting images to the web and most modern devices (like printers, monitors, etc.), sRGB is closest to your output space.

In the long run, it makes little sense to edit in a gamut larger than your output devices can represent. Although you increase precision by working in aRGB, you may actually be reducing your accuracy, as you force your rendering algorithm to rationalize between gamuts.

I'd be more concerned about profiling your monitor and printer.

Most modern output devices such as printers and high end monitors are larger than sRGB. It makes more sense other than generic web viewing to use the largest color space possible.

[scott1120]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

Are you taking about your working color space or your camera color space?

Camera color space. I think I will just leave in sRGB because my other cameras in the house can only have that color space.

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by scott1120

Camera color space. I think I will just leave in sRGB because my other cameras in the house can only have that color space.

You're joking right? I mean, that's like saying, none of my other cars can do 0-60 in 4 seconds so I'm just going to drive my Ferrari like my Volkswagon. Or, none of my other TVs can view HD so I'm going to watch my HD 60" plasma TV with the ratio set to 4:3 like my old TVs.

Really... why would you limit yourself simply because your 'other' cameras don't have the abilities of the 'better' one? That makes absolutely zero sense... to me. Does it make sense to anyone else?

- Wil

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by Tapper

Most image editors convert back and forth pretty well.

Once you convert from a larger color space to a smaller one, you cannot convert back to the larger one. Actually, you can... but all the data is lost. So, assuming you need a higher color space, you're screwed once you convert to (or start with) the sRGB color space.

- Wil

[johnastovall]

Originally Posted by ParkImaging

Once you convert from a larger color space to a smaller one, you cannot convert back to the larger one. Actually, you can... but all the data is lost. So, assuming you need a higher color space, you're screwed once you convert to (or start with) the sRGB color space.

- Wil

Which is why PhotoPro is the best place to stay until the very end.

[Wil_Bloodworth]

Originally Posted by johnastovall

Which is why PhotoPro is the best place to stay until the very end.

Assuming your camera supports that color space... I would agree. If your camera only supports AdobeRGB then it would just be pointless to do anything in ProPhoto. You would just be wasting space... for no benefit whatsoever.

- Wil

[billbunton]

Originally Posted by ParkImaging

Assuming your camera supports that color space... I would agree. If your camera only supports AdobeRGB then it would just be pointless to do anything in ProPhoto. You would just be wasting space... for no benefit whatsoever.
- Wil

Why would it matter if the camera supports that color space? The important thing is my raw converter supports ProPhoto. I'm not wasting space, because I'd be using 16-bit images for AdobeRGB as well as ProPhoto. And I know, because I've looked at the profiles I've run, that my printer has a gamut that exceeds AdobeRGB in some colors (and hopefully my next printer will exceed it even more :-)

[AndrewCCM]

Originally Posted by ParkImaging

Continuing on Jeff's vein... if you are shooting RAW, then just use Adobe RGB and forget about it. If you print at a lab that expects sRGB, then just convert to that when you need to... as Jeff said.

If you don't know whether or not you need ProPhoto RGB... then you don't need it. Ha ha. No... seriously!

- Wil

Just don't forget to convert to sRGB before posting images to the web. AdobeRGB files don't usually translate color well in most browsers.

For the record, I do most all my RAW conversions to Prophoto and only change to sRGB or Adobe RGB and 8bit JPG as part of my delivery process (either customer, web or lab). When printing at home, I find that ProPhoto works very well with my R2400 printer.

[Duffy Pratt]

Let's suppose you use PhotoPro RGB, and you shoot lots of images that take advantage of its extended gamut. When editing the image, it's likely you won't be able to see the colors you got. This makes the editing process in that range a kind of educated guess. To be sure about what you are doing, you may have to resort to hard proofing. But then, your printer may or may not cover the gamut of what you are shooting either.

Fortunately, this is not often a problem. Many, if not most images fall easily within the range of smaller color spaces.

If you do go with a very large color space, like AdobeRGB, make sure you have the resources to do everything in 16 bits.

Duffy