Color Management ??

[fitzperry]

This is something I've kind of neglected. For awhile I had PSE set up so that it did not embed a color profile in my images because ages ago I read that was the safest course if you're not doing the printing and don't want to mess around much with color management.

Now I'm using Lightroom for RAW conversion, and I'm not sure what I should be doing. I understand that sRGB is generally preferable for web viewing, and I thought that Adobe RGB was better for printing. However, Mpix (which I use for most of my printing) says that their "printers output in sRGB color space." So should I just keep everything in sRGB? Also, since a monitor only displays the sRGB range, does it matter which space you work in or does it only matter which profile is embedded with the image? And what is the effect of having no profile embedded?

Thanks!

 

[SharonLowe]

Color management essentially tells all the different devices how to match the color - what you see on your screen should be what you see when you print it out, etc. The standard for RGB color space is Adobe RGB which was designed to encompass the colors on a CMYK (cyan, magenta, yellow, key(black)) printer while using the primary colors on displays - Red, Green and Blue. It is a much wider gamut than sRGB, which was previously developed by HP and Microsoft for use on monitors, printers and the internet. Adobe has a new color space that is even wider than Adobe RGB called ProPhoto RGB. It has not been widely accepted in the print industry (yet) and is likely not supported by anyone other than Adobe right now.

To have the widest range of colors and therefore the best output no matter the device, you should start with the profile that has the widest gamut. If you don't color manage at all, there is no way for your printer to know what you see on your monitor, etc.

Some P&S cameras only shoot in the sRGB color space, which is probably why online printers say to submit as sRGB. You can convert an image to Adobe RGB but you don't really gain any colors by doing so. If you have a camera that allows you to shoot in Adobe RGB, you should use that setting because no matter what, it recognizes colors better and you can convert it to sRGB and still have a better image than if it had shot in sRGB - there is just more color information. This converted image should be a copy since you are going to a smaller color space.

For the average home user, sRGB is probably fine. But, as you get into larger prints or want a more detailed, rich print, it is best to use Adobe RGB (and a company that supports it if you don't do your own prints). It is not true that a monitor only sees sRGB; a calibrated monitor will see the wider gamut of Adobe RGB. The internet, however, is a different matter - images posted to the web should always be posted in the sRGB colorspace. If you post an image with Adobe RGB, it will seem pale and washed out.

Of note, with Windows Vista, PCs will be using the same color conversion technique Apple has been using for years.

 

[fitzperry]

If you have a camera that allows you to shoot in Adobe RGB, you should use that setting because no matter what, it recognizes colors better and you can convert it to sRGB and still have a better image than if it had shot in sRGB - there is just more color information. This converted image should be a copy since you are going to a smaller color space.

I was under the impression that RAW files capture all that data regardless of the color mode set on the camera. Is that not correct?

It is not true that a monitor only sees sRGB; a calibrated monitor will see the wider gamut of Adobe RGB.

I misunderstood this. Thanks for clearing it up.

The internet, however, is a different matter - images posted to the web should always be posted in the sRGB colorspace. If you post an image with Adobe RGB, it will seem pale and washed out.

Does that mean the same is true wrt printing? In other words, if an image with Adobe RGB is printed with a printer that only supports sRGB, will it look pale and washed out?

 

[SharonLowe]

I was under the impression that RAW files capture all that data regardless of the color mode set on the camera. Is that not correct?



I misunderstood this. Thanks for clearing it up.



Does that mean the same is true wrt printing? In other words, if an image with Adobe RGB is printed with a printer that only supports sRGB, will it look pale and washed out?

RAW - it can really only capture what you tell it to capture but I don't know for sure the answer. It would make an interesting experiment to shoot one item using RAW but changing the color parameters in the camera. My 1DsMkII gives me 5 plus 2 custom ones I can set up. None are sRGB. I have mine set on the 4th option which is Adobe RGB.

The actual printer, not the printing company, does't use RGB to print; it uses CMYK although some consumer models are starting to add blue and red inks to the mix rather than light magenta and light cyan, which is what the higher end printers use in addition to cyan, magenta, and yellow (and blacks, of course). I am not quite sure what would happen if you sent an Adobe RGB file to Mpix - would they convert it to sRGB or assume it was sRGB? If the latter, then yes, the print would likely be not as saturated as you expected because it would have its print profiles set up assuming it was starting with sRGB.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I once posted a rambling explanation of colorspaces. It might help.

For awhile I had PSE set up so that it did not embed a color profile in my images because ages ago I read that was the safest course if you're not doing the printing and don't want to mess around much with color management.

I would always embed a color profile. If you don't, there is no way for the recipient to know what colors you are talking about. They'll probably assume sRGB, so why not make that explicit.

In other words, if an image with Adobe RGB is printed with a printer that only supports sRGB, will it look pale and washed out?

Printers have their own internal color profile. They never really support sRGB. Printer drivers convert photos to their own profile. Some printer drivers might ignore the profile in your picture and assume that it is sRGB. That would be sad because sRGB is a fairly small color space and you'll lose color information if you convert to it.

I would recommend keeping your work in ProPhotoRGB or AdobeRGB until you want to output it. At that point, use sRGB for JPGs to be displayed on the web. Use AdobeRGB for things that you want to print. Don't use printers that can't handle profiles other than sRGB. It might not matter for relatively bland pictures, but for pictures with saturated greens, you'll be giving up a lot of color range.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

I should add that the big advantage to color management is the ability to consistently handle color. If your monitor and printing software are color space aware and everything is properly calibrated, each device will do it's best job to show you accurate colors. Without color management, it is hard to get the most out of your printing because you can't see what the prints will look like on your screen.

It's one reason why I print from Photoshop rather than Lightroom. Photoshop lets me soft proof pictures. That means that it adjusts the display of the picture on my screen to look as close as possible to the output on the printer. That's different than normal, in which it tries to display it as accurately as possible. With soft proofing, it takes into account the limitations of your printer. That can help you target adjustments to work around printer limitations. It's still not truly WYSIWYG, but its much closer than it would be without color management. My prints are much more vibrant since I started doing this.