Ia(sRGB) / II(AdobeRGB) / IIIa(sRGB)

dlscott56

I've had my D80 set for IIIa(sRGB) ever since I got it. I don't remember if I set it there or it was a default setting. I'm reading a book that suggests always shooting in AdobeRGB and was wondering what everyone else does.

dlscott56

Was just reading through some items found here searching for Adobe RGB and it seems if I shoot RAW it doesn't matter?

Nikolai

dlscott56 wrote:

Was just reading through some items found here searching for Adobe RGB and it seems if I shoot RAW it doesn't matter?

Nothing matters when you shoot RAW, except

• framing
• ISO
• aperture
• shutter speed, and
• focal length.

ziggy53

I tend to shoot all paying projects in RAW and then process in 16 bit sRGB color space. While Adobe RGB does have a "wider gamut", sRGB tends to have better distribution in those values relating to flesh tones. Likewise, if you process in Adobe RGB and then have to convert to sRGB for printing or Internet usage, any benefit that Adobe RGB might have provided is largely nullified in the conversion.

Most of the discussion relating to which is "absolutely" better is esoteric because, while the differences might be measurable, they are largely not visible.

My recommendation is to use 16 bit sRGB as the workspace unless you are "publishing" the works using CMYK color seperation, then Adobe RGB might have an edge. (Saturated greens on an inkjet printer may also look better in Adobe RGB.) 16 bit tonal gradations are ultimately more important than either color space so make sure you save intermediate files as 16 bit PSD or 16 bit TIF/TIFF.

Also, it's important to save original RAW files for those images which might have to be processed diferently in the future. (Some color houses prefer to do their own processing and may internally use ProPhoto RGB, for instance. In that case they will use your images for guidance in tonality and for cropping, etc.)

In the mean time you might review:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-debate.html

dlscott56

Nikolai wrote:

Nothing matters when you shoot RAW, except

• framing
• ISO
• aperture
• shutter speed, and
• focal length.

Thanks Nik

dlscott56

ziggy53 wrote:

I tend to shoot all paying projects in RAW and then process in 16 bit sRGB color space. While Adobe RGB does have a "wider gamut", sRGB tends to have better distribution in those values relating to flesh tones. Likewise, if you process in Adobe RGB and then have to convert to sRGB for printing or Internet usage, any benefit that Adobe RGB might have provided is largely nullified in the conversion.

Most of the discussion relating to which is "absolutely" better is esoteric because, while the differences might be measurable, they are largely not visible.

My recommendation is to use 16 bit sRGB as the workspace unless you are "publishing" the works using CMYK color seperation, then Adobe RGB might have an edge. (Saturated greens on an inkjet printer may also look better in Adobe RGB.) 16 bit tonal gradations are ultimately more important than either color space so make sure you save intermediate files as 16 bit PSD or 16 bit TIF/TIFF.

Also, it's important to save original RAW files for those images which might have to be processed diferently in the future. (Some color houses prefer to do their own processing and may internally use ProPhoto RGB, for instance. In that case they will use your images for guidance in tonality and for cropping, etc.)

In the mean time you might review:

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-AdobeRGB1998.htm
http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-debate.html

Good advice and links, thanks Ziggy.