sRGB vs PhotoRGB vs AdobeRGB


Status
Not open for further replies.

Steplim

New Member
May 11, 2005
297
0
0
53
One North
#1
Hello PS expert out there,

Read a fair bit on colour space setting through Forum, books etc and I am still a confuse about which the choose.

I know that sRGB is 8bit and photoRGB is 16bit but taking into consideration that I do not calibrate my monitor and printer, what should be the best colour sapce to use.

:)
 

Deadpoet

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2004
4,619
0
0
#2
if you have to ask, stick with sRGB ...

and for majority of the photo shot, sRGB is sufficient
 

Steplim

New Member
May 11, 2005
297
0
0
53
One North
#5
Hi superuser, senior member, DP,

Thanks for your reply.

Can help to make your replies more constructive. Why sRGB? This is only 8bit right?
With PhotoRGB, you are having 16bit colours, am I right.
For Web-posting, jpg pics, what you need is only 8bits but what about printings?
 

Steplim

New Member
May 11, 2005
297
0
0
53
One North
#11
Thank.....Ortega for that informative link.

Now I am clear what colour space to be used. As I shoot RAW 99% of the time, so may stick to editing in 16bit than convert to 8bit.:)

This is a good tip....:thumbsup:

"While it is always a good idea to do your editing in 16-bit mode, it is even more important when working in a wider gamut color space. After editing, you can optionally convert to 8-bit if needed since no further data loss can occur.:




The bright red shows the portion in each where clipping would occur. As you can see, sRGB loses quite a bit, while Adobe RGB comes much closer. Only ProPhoto RGB is able to encompass all the colors without clipping. The pre-dawn sky itself is somewhat pink, but what matters here is the red clipping display, not the pink sky. :thumbsup:

By converting your RAW files into ProPhoto RGB in Adobe Camera Raw you preserve more of what the sensor actually saw. Once you open them in Photoshop though, you need to decide what to do next. :thumbsup:

In summary,....
In an 8-bit world, sRGB represented the best compromise between gamut and usability. Now that we can use 16-bit for most things, Adobe RGB rules the day. Once the world moves from 16-bit to 32-bit images, I will undoubtedly start using ProPhoto as my working space.
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#12
Do you need that amount of details vs the processing time involved?
 

Steplim

New Member
May 11, 2005
297
0
0
53
One North
#13
Yep. I agreed with you 100%.

I use to spend hours in front of my PC monitors to screen through 200-300 shots after events that I covered and is no joke!

After gaining some experience with CS3, I am changing my workflow where I sort what pictures have to undergo further editing and majority of my pictures will be processed and be converted straight to sRGB, 8 bit as jpeg. :) (no question about it)

Those keeper pictures will be PP using PS and convert to TIFF or PSD format.
 

Deadpoet

Senior Member
Oct 18, 2004
4,619
0
0
#14
shooting events, shoot sRGB and be done with it. If the photo is to be display online only, shoot sRGB.

Granted, teh color gamut of aRGB is larger, they need processing to bring th color out. Not something that is simple.

Your understanding of the various color profile is correct acedemically, but in practice you need to ask 2 questions, do you need it and do you know how to work with it.

Btw, most if not all photo printing out there right now, it's sRGB.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom