SRGB or Adobe RGB
Feb 12, 2013 12:33:43 #
I found this link quite informative and answered the question for me so well I can make an educated choice.
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-debate.html
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-debate.html
Feb 12, 2013 12:37:57 #
Interestingly, the photo book publishing company I use asks for all the uploaded photos to be sRGB.
Frank T wrote:
I'd say srgb if it's going to be on a computer screen and Adobe RGB if you're going to print it.
SRGB was designed for computer screens and Adobe for print media.
Can I see the difference? Not really.
SRGB was designed for computer screens and Adobe for print media.
Can I see the difference? Not really.
Feb 12, 2013 13:31:32 #
If you are posting to the web convert your profile on your image to sRGB but on your own computer use Pro Photo or Adobe RGB. Web browsers are compatible with sRGB but don't do well with the other two mediums
Feb 12, 2013 14:00:04 #
runsthebitterroot wrote:
Getting a good photo is a hard enough job without worrying about color space. Seems everything works just fine in sRGB. Why throw a variable in there that may or may not give good results?
Larry
Larry
I use sRGB (as does Larry). My reasons for this are that most places you put photo's today (web, and print) require sRGB. I can not make any sense of taking the picture or PP in a color space that is not part of the final product. Many times more is just more and has no practical reasons.
Example: You are using aRGB or ProRGB, you take the picture in that color space and make you PP decisions in that color space. However, your final use of the image requires sRGB so you let PS/PSE etc. convert it to JPEG in sRGB, and your colors look different. Why would you endure that frustration when that can avoided by working in sRGB to begin with?
Feb 12, 2013 14:08:48 #
sueyeisert
Loc: New Jersey
infocus wrote:
sRGB because I've been told it's a bigger gammut.
Effjayess wrote:
I have seen and heard good arguments for both. Would fellow UHHers weigh in on the question. If your camera has both what do you select and why.
sRGB because I've been told it's a bigger gammut.
Adobe RGB has the bigger gammut. I use Adobe RGB in my camera. If necessary I'll convert depending who is doing the printing.
Feb 12, 2013 14:23:26 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
AdobeRGB because it has 8000 different levels of brightness and sRGB only has 256. Huge difference.
Effjayess wrote:
I have seen and heard good arguments for both. Would fellow UHHers weigh in on the question. If your camera has both what do you select and why.
AdobeRGB because it has 8000 different levels of brightness and sRGB only has 256. Huge difference.
32769 actually.
Feb 12, 2013 15:57:26 #
digicamking
Loc: Raleigh, NC
GoofyNewfie wrote:
Adobe RGB (aRGB) has the bigger color space- extended greens and blues, so if your printer can reproduce it, for landscapes, it's the way to go. For portraits, it probably won't make a difference, unless you are shooting Smurfs or the Green Lantern.
http://www.apnphotographyschool.com/working-spaces-srgb-vs-adobe-rgb-vs-prophoto-rgb/
http://www.apnphotographyschool.com/working-spaces-srgb-vs-adobe-rgb-vs-prophoto-rgb/
You will find that most professional labs (those printing wet process) will want and/or require you to submit sRGB. I have always set my camera to sRGB because I use a pro lab. It is my understanding if you are inkjet printing then you should use RGB.
Feb 12, 2013 17:27:43 #
russelray wrote:
Nope. I haven't printed a picture in 32 years yet have over 78,000 now. I have digital picture frames, digital photo books, computer slide shows, etc.
Effjayess wrote:
But dont we all evetually print?
Nope. I haven't printed a picture in 32 years yet have over 78,000 now. I have digital picture frames, digital photo books, computer slide shows, etc.
And when you go to the pearly gates, all those 78000 images will disappear in a puff of cyber-smoke.
Feb 12, 2013 17:38:19 #
mfeveland wrote:
Try this link. Very interesting.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm
Effjayess wrote:
I have seen and heard good arguments for both. Would fellow UHHers weigh in on the question. If your camera has both what do you select and why.
Try this link. Very interesting.
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm
:thumbup:
Feb 12, 2013 17:48:43 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
AdobeRGB because it has 8000 different levels of brightness and sRGB only has 256. Huge difference.
Effjayess wrote:
I have seen and heard good arguments for both. Would fellow UHHers weigh in on the question. If your camera has both what do you select and why.
AdobeRGB because it has 8000 different levels of brightness and sRGB only has 256. Huge difference.
NO. You are confusing bit-depth with color space with brightness levels. No connection at all. I shoot sRGB, Process sRGB, and print sRGB. And I send 16-bit files to my Epson 3880.
Read this: http://www.photoshopessentials.com/essentials/16-bit/
The reason is that for portrait work, virtually all the colors that matter are well inside the sRGB space. If I did landscapes or wildlife, I would use AdobeRGB 1998.
Feb 12, 2013 18:49:27 #
Thank you Captain for being the voice of clarity. Glad I was doing something right!
CaptainC wrote:
quote=jeep_daddy quote=Effjayess I have seen and... (show quote)
Feb 12, 2013 20:04:44 #
drcufone
Loc: scottsdale, az
infocus wrote:
sRGB because I've been told it's a bigger gammut.
Effjayess wrote:
I have seen and heard good arguments for both. Would fellow UHHers weigh in on the question. If your camera has both what do you select and why.
sRGB because I've been told it's a bigger gammut.
You got it backwards. adobe RGB has the larger gamut.
Feb 12, 2013 22:50:15 #
CaptainC wrote:
quote=jeep_daddy quote=Effjayess I have seen and... (show quote)
You're right Captain. My mistake. I guess it was raw verses jpg that has the huge difference in brightness levels. I think I'm going out of my mind with all the stuff to know about photography, editing, computers, cameras and other related subjects. It's endless.
Feb 12, 2013 23:09:05 #
jeep_daddy wrote:
quote=CaptainC quote=jeep_daddy quote=Effjayess... (show quote)
It IS tough to keep it all straight. The sRGB vs. Adobe RGB has nothing to do with brightness - just color space - the ability to reproduce colors.
8-bit vs. 16-bit has to do with the how MANY colors can be produced: 8-bit is millions, 16-bit is trillions.
A raw file has no color space or bit depth until is is processed. In Adobe Camera Raw, down at the bottom of the page, is how you select what is going to be applied to that image when you click Open Image. THAT is when it becomes sRGB, AdobeRGB, 16-bit, or 8-bit. It is also where you choose the pixel resolution. In Lightroom it happens at Export.
I have no idea how other raw processors work, but it has to be something similar.
Feb 13, 2013 06:49:45 #
CaptainC wrote:
br NO. You are confusing bit-depth with color spa... (show quote)
Thank the Lord someone knows what he is talking about!
:thumbup:
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.