Photoshop - photos based on raw format look paler on website

corzoncorzon Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
edited October 7, 2008 in Finishing School
Hi all,

From more experienced photographers I got the advice to work in RAW format instead of letting my NIKON convert the photo into JPG. Photoshop works fine with this, and I am satisfied with the result in Photoshop (or Windows Photogalery). However, if I upload my photos to a website, or prepare my own website with AceHTML, the photos show up much duller!!

This does not happen with photos that are directly converted (by my camera) into jpg.

This is rather awkward. Though the raw format definitely offers more control, I loose controle once I save in Photoshop!

Any suggestions how to tackle this are very welcome!

Regards,
Cor

Comments

  • jfriendjfriend Registered Users Posts: 8,097 Major grins
    edited October 5, 2008
    corzon wrote:
    Hi all,

    From more experienced photographers I got the advice to work in RAW format instead of letting my NIKON convert the photo into JPG. Photoshop works fine with this, and I am satisfied with the result in Photoshop (or Windows Photogalery). However, if I upload my photos to a website, or prepare my own website with AceHTML, the photos show up much duller!!

    This does not happen with photos that are directly converted (by my camera) into jpg.

    This is rather awkward. Though the raw format definitely offers more control, I loose controle once I save in Photoshop!

    Any suggestions how to tackle this are very welcome!

    Regards,
    Cor

    This sounds like you are uploading images to the web in the AdobeRGB colorspace instead of the sRGB colorspace. Since most web browsers are not smart about colorspaces, uploading in the AdobeRGB colorspace will cause the images to display as washed out color or dull color.

    If this is indeed the cause, you need to make sure that when you generate JPEGs from your RAW files, your RAW converter is generating images in the sRGB colorspace. If you are using Adobe Camera RAW in Photoshop for this conversion, you should see a setting for the colorspace near the bottom of that window. If you are using something else, let us know and we can probably help you find the right setting.

    Remember, the web wants images in the sRGB colorspace. If you have an image in the AdobeRGB colorspace and you want to convert it to the sRGB colorspace, you can do so in Photoshop with Edit/Convert to Profile/sRGB. Do not use the Assign Profile command.
    --John
    Homepage • Popular
    JFriend's javascript customizations • Secrets for getting fast answers on Dgrin
     Always include a link to your site when posting a question
  • corzoncorzon Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
    edited October 5, 2008
    Remember, the web wants images in the sRGB colorspace. If you have an image in the AdobeRGB colorspace and you want to convert it to the sRGB colorspace, you can do so in Photoshop with Edit/Convert to Profile/sRGB. Do not use the Assign Profile command.

    Dear John,

    This tackles the problem completely! Thanks very much for your invaluable suggestion - it makes my evening!!

    Kind regards
    Cor
  • davidweaverdavidweaver Registered Users Posts: 681 Major grins
    edited October 5, 2008
    Click on the color-size-depth info in the bottom of Camera Raw in CS3. Change this to sRGB IEC61966-2.

    This don't change the original image colorspace just puts it into sRGB for workflow processing.

    Could you post a picture of a RAW file that was saved off to jpeg? Could you post one that had no processing and then the smae image processed? I'm going to add that there likely some things you can do in RAW workflow to improve the images. There is a difference in the colorspace but it is (Please hold the spam) not that big a difference for many images. Sure you get some dulling from a compressed color space but i've only seen a few examples of it ahving spent a few years working in pro photo labs.

    Also, what tweaks are you making in workflow?


    Ken Rockwell does an easy to understand piece here:
    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm

    Many will disagree with him but he makes a good point when he says:
    "[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Adobe RGB should never be used unless you really know what you're doing and do all your printing yourself. If you really know what you're doing and working in publishing, go right ahead and use it. If you have to ask, don't even try it. "[/FONT]

    Good background info here:
    http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm

    Keep in mind that if your monitor only does sRGB then the colors they are trying to show you wont be accurate. as they will outside of the color gamut.


    Its a good read.

    Cheers,
    David
  • corzoncorzon Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
    edited October 6, 2008
    Dear David,

    Today has been quite busy, but I hope to show some example soon - maybe tomorrow. Thanks for your interest!

    Cheers
    Cor
  • corzoncorzon Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
    edited October 7, 2008
    OK, here's the Adobe RGB photo. Starting with raw, I did enhance saturation + 20, curves: shadow + 32; then selection of part of image, import to 'normal' photoshop window, downsize to 800x600, then save as jpg.
  • corzoncorzon Registered Users Posts: 5 Beginner grinner
    edited October 7, 2008
    corzon wrote:
    OK, here's the Adobe RGB photo.

    and here the sRGB. The only additional operation was changing the profile to sRGB.

    Maybe the difference looks subtle - but in insects subtle differences can be important. With any photo I immediately experienced the same dulness feeling. So even if it is not that big a difference, it annoys me rather strongly. So I'm happy with the solution!
Sign In or Register to comment.