Adobe RGB or sRGB???

[Bill, 70's military B&W]

I'm sure this topic has been beat to death but I have to ask "which should I use?"
I just bought an Epson 3880 and I use Canon equipment.
I know this is LF Forum and I'm asking about 35mm, but I'd really like to hear others opinions. Many use both.

I have tried both, and just ended up with problems... mainly because the world seems to revolve around sRGB. I send e-mails and the sRGB shots seem more realistic on computers, mine and theirs, also MPIX seems to want sRGB, other printing shops too. I know I have my own printer now and I can do either, so I'm asking for experiences and results from others.
Thanks,
Bill

[Larry Gebhardt]

Ideally you would shoot RAW and convert the image into the widest color space that your output can support. For your new printer you may want to consider using Prophoto RGB. When you shoot RAW it doesn't matter what color space the camera is set to. You will still want to put images on the web in sRGB, but it's easy to convert the image to that before publishing.

If you are shooting JPG, use Adobe RGB on your camera. I would only use sRGB on the camera if I knew the only use fore the images would be web display (like for pictures for an ebay auction).

I use Adobe Lightroom for most tasks around my DSLR images. One of the main reasons is it handles color spaces very well (converting when it makes sense). I highly recommend it.

[David A. Goldfarb]

As a general rule, I use Adobe RGB for print output, sRGB for the web. On my camera, I use Adobe RGB, and use the "Save for Web" option in CS5 usually to resize and convert to sRGB.

[paulr]

Ideally you would shoot RAW and convert the image into the widest color space that your output can support.

You should convert to the widest RGB color space available regardless of your output device. This is currently Prophoto RGB, as Larry suggests.

The reason is that any colors lost in your conversion are lost forever. The clipped colors will often occur outside the gammut of your current monitor, so you won't even have control over the rendering. Best to hang onto as much information as possible.

It's not a problem that a space like ProPhoto is bigger than your printerr's gamut. You can always use your printer's profile to soft-proof, and then use it as your printing destination space. Or if you're converting for the web or email, soft proof and convert the low res version to sRgb. There are no disadvantages to working this way. Some have pointed out that with a big color space, the editing increments are larger. But if you're working in 16 bit mode, this won't be an issue. The increments will be minute even in Prophoto.

[Andy Eads]

Bill, sRGB was created to accommodate "everymans" home computer monitor. If memory serves me, it was proposed by HP and Microsoft many years back for the then new internet. So it is really a display profile not a print profile. Adobe RGB was created to be a capture profile bridging the gap for graphic arts and printing professionals and encompassing a gamut that cameras and scanners of the time could achieve. Photopro RGB was a Kodak invention that aimed to be a high end capture space that permitted color adjustments with the fewest shifts elsewhere in the gamut, especially if using more than 8 bits per color. In RAW, each camera has its own gamut but the manufacturer will not likely let you at that profile. Larry's advice makes good sense but, as always, your personal use will drive your decisions. The book "Real World Color Management" is the most comprehensive treatment I know of. You may want to check it out.
Andy

[Gary Tarbert]

For what it's worth digital camera Raw adobe RGB,scanning Prophoto RGB , Photoshop workflow prophoto RGB , Anything converted for web or email converted to sRGB .Never for print output Cheers Gary

[pherold]

Steve Upton had an article a while back that spoke to both sides of this question. While most of us here are "Input Centric" there's a place in the world where some can be "Output Centric":
http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Color_Management_Myths_26-28

[bob carnie]

Really nice description Pat.

Steve Upton had an article a while back that spoke to both sides of this question. While most of us here are "Input Centric" there's a place in the world where some can be "Output Centric":
http://www.colorwiki.com/wiki/Color_Management_Myths_26-28

[Brian Ellis]

What Gary said. Use Pro Photo where you can, RGB where you can't. sRGB only for the web.

[Greg Miller]

Conventional wisdom says use the widest gamut color space (ProPhoto RGB). But for the purist that is not always the best option. A 16 bit color space always has the exact same amount of discrete colors available. So sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB all have the exact same total number of discrete colors. Since ProPhoto RGB has a wider gamut than sRGB, Prophoto RGB's colors must be spaced more widely. That is great for an image that contains colors not contained within sRGB, but is actually is a detriment for low gamut images (think foggy scene). So the absolute best color space depends on the image and the colors the image contains. You can argue that the difference is not visible to humans in a 16 bit work flow, but for a bunch of people who obsess about gear and subtle tonal gradations, it is at least worth thinking about.