Thanks CHG-CANON for your quick response and for taking the time to research my printer. From what you said, it appears that the editor (in my case PSE) assigns the color space to the file it outputs, correct? I always change the color space to Adobe RGB as soon as I open a directly file from Camera Raw. I assume this is the best way to proceed if I use Topaz Studio or NIK during the editing process. That way those plug-ins will work in the RGB space (yes/no?). Regarding the question about posting RGB images, I've attached two, and you can judge if the color looks OK.
Thanks again for your excellent input.

1) When you open a raw file in ACR, it is converted to an RGB bitmap in a working color space of your choice, at the bit depth you choose. Then it's converted to the MONITOR color space for viewing, editing, and adjustment. Once you make it look good on the monitor with the ACR toolset, and you click Open, it is converted from raw to the working color space and bit depth. Then, when you finish working with it, you choose the color space and bit depth you want and save it.

2) If your computer is set up properly, it will read all embedded and tagged profiles and make the correct conversion to your monitor or printer. If you strip off the EXIF data and the profile, however, so the JPEG contains ONLY the bitmap data, then unless the color space really WAS sRGB, most applications will display the file as if it were sRGB, and you will see it with false colors. Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB images look TERRIBLE when interpreted as sRGB.

Proper color management relies upon either an embedded profile (the profile itself is embedded in the image file), or a TAGGED profile (the profile is mentioned in the EXIF data which is embedded in the file). Color-managed applications will look first for an embedded profile, then for a tagged profile, then they may default to sRGB, and in some cases, NO color management (Generic RGB).

See examples. #1 was converted from raw to SRGB. #2 was converted from raw to Adobe RGB. #3 was converted from raw to ProPhoto RGB.

The PREVIEW versions of these had their profiles and EXIF stripped off when uploaded to UHH. The Adobe RGB preview looks dull. The ProPhoto RGB preview looks horrible! The DOWNLOAD versions should all look normal, because they are intact. MOST browsers will convert them correctly to the monitor color space.

Color management relies on EMBEDDED or TAGGED profiles. Embedded profiles are stuffed into the files themselves. Tagged profiles are just named in the EXIF table, and referenced by the operating system for conversion using a stored profile in the operating system.

Answer: nothing good

Did I get your attention? Are you ready for another urban myth of photography to be knocked down? Here we go.

If you shoot JPEG, are you editing all your images always? If no, don't set your camera to Adobe RGB as you need to, at the minimum, output the colorspace to the general sRGB colorspace before sharing your images.

The choice of color space is a 50/50 choice, as in: sRGB you win, Adobe RGB you lose.

If you shoot RAW, you're wasting your time completely. Why? Your file names get an underscore in the first position like _MG0001.NEF and RAW files don't have a colorspace anyway. RAW files are the original sensor data. Camera sensors don't have a colorspace. Colorspace is an attribute of your digital editor or how the color data is encoded into a display format when the RAW data is converted to JPEG or TIFF, etc. That's how a tool like Lightroom or Topaz Sharpen can use ProPhotoRGB against your RAW files even though ProPhotoRGB isn't even an option in the camera menu options.

Do you shoot RAW and JPEG so you can share the JPEGs quickly? Now you're wasting your time by a factor of 2x. Your 'quick JPEGs' now require a colorspace conversion before sharing, defeating 'quick'. Your RAW files, as noted above, get a less useful filename while having no technical impact of using the Adobe RGB colorspace camera setting.

Now, let's get to the real urban myths:

Myth1 - Adobe RGB is better for printing

Really? Do you print your images? Does your printer (local or third-party) accept files in Adobe RGB? Have you ever compared two prints, one in sRGB against the same image in Adobe RGB? If you have any NO responses to these probing questions, then Adobe RGB is not really better for printing.

Myth2 - Adobe RGB is the better colorspace

Really? When your RAW sensor data was converted to an 8-bit JPEG, the 12- or 14-bit data from the sensor was 'compressed' into the maximum storage capabilities of the 8-bit JPEG format. To simplify the high-level idea, Adobe RGB emphasizes different colors / tones over sRGB, but it cannot 'store' more data in 8-bit than sRGB can store in the same 8-bit encoding. BTW, RGB is literally Red-Green-Blue and this colorspace data is simply all the color tones and relative brightness of mixing Red with Green with Blue to create the rich colors and tones of the world.

When should I use Adobe RGB?

I'm trying to argue: never.

If I haven't convince you yet, consider these four reasons / input requirements, all that must be met together:

a. You shoot in your camera's highest quality JPEG setting, i.e., the highest pixel resolution and the least JPEG compression.

b. You edit all your JPEGs in a workflow that reliably enforces a conversion to the sRGB colorspace for online sharing of the edited results.

c. Any transitions between software in your workflow maintain the ProPhotoRGB (or Adobe RGB) colorspace when the transition files are created.

d. You have a printer that accepts the Adobe RGB files and prints in the Adobe RGB colorspace (and does not perform a behind the scenes sRGB converion).

e. (Optional) You've paid extra (a whole lot extra) to buy an "Adobe RGB" monitor to see your colorspace during editing

Still not convinced? Here's two UHH links:

The first post shows a problem using the wrong colorspace on page 1 of the original post. Just skip to page 2 to see an example of the image converted and posted to sRGB. This is what you risk by using Adobe RGB:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-362867-1.html

Here's a longer, boring thread about the two colorspaces:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-364870-1.html

Answer: nothing good

Did I get your attention? Are you ready for another urban myth of photography to be knocked down? Here we go.

If you shoot JPEG, are you editing all your images always? If no, don't set your camera to Adobe RGB as you need to, at the minimum, output the colorspace to the general sRGB colorspace before sharing your images.

The choice of color space is a 50/50 choice, as in: sRGB you win, Adobe RGB you lose.

If you shoot RAW, you're wasting your time completely. Why? Your file names get an underscore in the first position like _MG0001.NEF and RAW files don't have a colorspace anyway. RAW files are the original sensor data. Camera sensors don't have a colorspace. Colorspace is an attribute of your digital editor or how the color data is encoded into a display format when the RAW data is converted to JPEG or TIFF, etc. That's how a tool like Lightroom or Topaz Sharpen can use ProPhotoRGB against your RAW files even though ProPhotoRGB isn't even an option in the camera menu options.

Do you shoot RAW and JPEG so you can share the JPEGs quickly? Now you're wasting your time by a factor of 2x. Your 'quick JPEGs' now require a colorspace conversion before sharing, defeating 'quick'. Your RAW files, as noted above, get a less useful filename while having no technical impact of using the Adobe RGB colorspace camera setting.

Now, let's get to the real urban myths:

Myth1 - Adobe RGB is better for printing

Really? Do you print your images? Does your printer (local or third-party) accept files in Adobe RGB? Have you ever compared two prints, one in sRGB against the same image in Adobe RGB? If you have any NO responses to these probing questions, then Adobe RGB is not really better for printing.

Myth2 - Adobe RGB is the better colorspace

Really? When your RAW sensor data was converted to an 8-bit JPEG, the 12- or 14-bit data from the sensor was 'compressed' into the maximum storage capabilities of the 8-bit JPEG format. To simplify the high-level idea, Adobe RGB emphasizes different colors / tones over sRGB, but it cannot 'store' more data in 8-bit than sRGB can store in the same 8-bit encoding. BTW, RGB is literally Red-Green-Blue and this colorspace data is simply all the color tones and relative brightness of mixing Red with Green with Blue to create the rich colors and tones of the world.

When should I use Adobe RGB?

I'm trying to argue: never.

If I haven't convince you yet, consider these four reasons / input requirements, all that must be met together:

a. You shoot in your camera's highest quality JPEG setting, i.e., the highest pixel resolution and the least JPEG compression.

b. You edit all your JPEGs in a workflow that reliably enforces a conversion to the sRGB colorspace for online sharing of the edited results.

c. Any transitions between software in your workflow maintain the ProPhotoRGB (or Adobe RGB) colorspace when the transition files are created.

d. You have a printer that accepts the Adobe RGB files and prints in the Adobe RGB colorspace (and does not perform a behind the scenes sRGB converion).

e. (Optional) You've paid extra (a whole lot extra) to buy an "Adobe RGB" monitor to see your colorspace during editing

Still not convinced? Here's two UHH links:

The first post shows a problem using the wrong colorspace on page 1 of the original post. Just skip to page 2 to see an example of the image converted and posted to sRGB. This is what you risk by using Adobe RGB:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-362867-1.html

Here's a longer, boring thread about the two colorspaces:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-364870-1.html

Answer: nothing good

Did I get your attention? Are you ready for another urban myth of photography to be knocked down? Here we go.

If you shoot JPEG, are you editing all your images always? If no, don't set your camera to Adobe RGB as you need to, at the minimum, output the colorspace to the general sRGB colorspace before sharing your images.

The choice of color space is a 50/50 choice, as in: sRGB you win, Adobe RGB you lose.

If you shoot RAW, you're wasting your time completely. Why? Your file names get an underscore in the first position like _MG0001.NEF and RAW files don't have a colorspace anyway. RAW files are the original sensor data. Camera sensors don't have a colorspace. Colorspace is an attribute of your digital editor or how the color data is encoded into a display format when the RAW data is converted to JPEG or TIFF, etc. That's how a tool like Lightroom or Topaz Sharpen can use ProPhotoRGB against your RAW files even though ProPhotoRGB isn't even an option in the camera menu options.

Do you shoot RAW and JPEG so you can share the JPEGs quickly? Now you're wasting your time by a factor of 2x. Your 'quick JPEGs' now require a colorspace conversion before sharing, defeating 'quick'. Your RAW files, as noted above, get a less useful filename while having no technical impact of using the Adobe RGB colorspace camera setting.

Now, let's get to the real urban myths:

Myth1 - Adobe RGB is better for printing

Really? Do you print your images? Does your printer (local or third-party) accept files in Adobe RGB? Have you ever compared two prints, one in sRGB against the same image in Adobe RGB? If you have any NO responses to these probing questions, then Adobe RGB is not really better for printing.

Myth2 - Adobe RGB is the better colorspace

Really? When your RAW sensor data was converted to an 8-bit JPEG, the 12- or 14-bit data from the sensor was 'compressed' into the maximum storage capabilities of the 8-bit JPEG format. To simplify the high-level idea, Adobe RGB emphasizes different colors / tones over sRGB, but it cannot 'store' more data in 8-bit than sRGB can store in the same 8-bit encoding. BTW, RGB is literally Red-Green-Blue and this colorspace data is simply all the color tones and relative brightness of mixing Red with Green with Blue to create the rich colors and tones of the world.

When should I use Adobe RGB?

I'm trying to argue: never.

If I haven't convince you yet, consider these four reasons / input requirements, all that must be met together:

a. You shoot in your camera's highest quality JPEG setting, i.e., the highest pixel resolution and the least JPEG compression.

b. You edit all your JPEGs in a workflow that reliably enforces a conversion to the sRGB colorspace for online sharing of the edited results.

c. Any transitions between software in your workflow maintain the ProPhotoRGB (or Adobe RGB) colorspace when the transition files are created.

d. You have a printer that accepts the Adobe RGB files and prints in the Adobe RGB colorspace (and does not perform a behind the scenes sRGB converion).

e. (Optional) You've paid extra (a whole lot extra) to buy an "Adobe RGB" monitor to see your colorspace during editing

Still not convinced? Here's two UHH links:

The first post shows a problem using the wrong colorspace on page 1 of the original post. Just skip to page 2 to see an example of the image converted and posted to sRGB. This is what you risk by using Adobe RGB:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-362867-1.html

Here's a longer, boring thread about the two colorspaces:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-364870-1.html

Answer: nothing good

Did I get your attention? Are you ready for another urban myth of photography to be knocked down? Here we go.

If you shoot JPEG, are you editing all your images always? If no, don't set your camera to Adobe RGB as you need to, at the minimum, output the colorspace to the general sRGB colorspace before sharing your images.

The choice of color space is a 50/50 choice, as in: sRGB you win, Adobe RGB you lose.

If you shoot RAW, you're wasting your time completely. Why? Your file names get an underscore in the first position like _MG0001.NEF and RAW files don't have a colorspace anyway. RAW files are the original sensor data. Camera sensors don't have a colorspace. Colorspace is an attribute of your digital editor or how the color data is encoded into a display format when the RAW data is converted to JPEG or TIFF, etc. That's how a tool like Lightroom or Topaz Sharpen can use ProPhotoRGB against your RAW files even though ProPhotoRGB isn't even an option in the camera menu options.

Do you shoot RAW and JPEG so you can share the JPEGs quickly? Now you're wasting your time by a factor of 2x. Your 'quick JPEGs' now require a colorspace conversion before sharing, defeating 'quick'. Your RAW files, as noted above, get a less useful filename while having no technical impact of using the Adobe RGB colorspace camera setting.

Now, let's get to the real urban myths:

Myth1 - Adobe RGB is better for printing

Really? Do you print your images? Does your printer (local or third-party) accept files in Adobe RGB? Have you ever compared two prints, one in sRGB against the same image in Adobe RGB? If you have any NO responses to these probing questions, then Adobe RGB is not really better for printing.

Myth2 - Adobe RGB is the better colorspace

Really? When your RAW sensor data was converted to an 8-bit JPEG, the 12- or 14-bit data from the sensor was 'compressed' into the maximum storage capabilities of the 8-bit JPEG format. To simplify the high-level idea, Adobe RGB emphasizes different colors / tones over sRGB, but it cannot 'store' more data in 8-bit than sRGB can store in the same 8-bit encoding. BTW, RGB is literally Red-Green-Blue and this colorspace data is simply all the color tones and relative brightness of mixing Red with Green with Blue to create the rich colors and tones of the world.

When should I use Adobe RGB?

I'm trying to argue: never.

If I haven't convince you yet, consider these four reasons / input requirements, all that must be met together:

a. You shoot in your camera's highest quality JPEG setting, i.e., the highest pixel resolution and the least JPEG compression.

b. You edit all your JPEGs in a workflow that reliably enforces a conversion to the sRGB colorspace for online sharing of the edited results.

c. Any transitions between software in your workflow maintain the ProPhotoRGB (or Adobe RGB) colorspace when the transition files are created.

d. You have a printer that accepts the Adobe RGB files and prints in the Adobe RGB colorspace (and does not perform a behind the scenes sRGB converion).

e. (Optional) You've paid extra (a whole lot extra) to buy an "Adobe RGB" monitor to see your colorspace during editing

Still not convinced? Here's two UHH links:

The first post shows a problem using the wrong colorspace on page 1 of the original post. Just skip to page 2 to see an example of the image converted and posted to sRGB. This is what you risk by using Adobe RGB:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-362867-1.html

Here's a longer, boring thread about the two colorspaces:

https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-364870-1.html