Colour Space on SmugMug

threeshoes

I have just discovered, not having researched it before, that SmugMug's interface converts images to sRGB. I have always used aRGB since I understand that it gives a wider gamut of colour; although I'm no expert, it seems to me that that would be a more appropriate colour space for SmugMug to use.

If it were possible to use either, surely that would be even better, and I think that most decent browsers (even the latest Internet Explorer) adapt to the colour profile embedded in an image.

What does anyone else think?

AceCo55

And by far the majority of printers use sRBG

AperturePlus

Agree with AceCo55 - it is a printer-related consideration. Other than one fine-art printer in my neck of the woods, all others use sRGB.

threeshoes

Surely that consideration is lower than maintaining a better amount of colour in the image file (if that is what happens with aRGB)? The SmugMug explanation seems to be persuasive except that there is no difference in the rendering of the examples given. I've tried it in Safari, Firefox, Chrome and Opera (I don't use IE, but I think that it would adapt to the colour profile) and there is no difference in the appearance of the images.

Finally, surely your printer's software will convert whatever it sees? Certainly my Pixma 9500 II works fine with either.

threeshoes

I forgot to mention that I print from Apple Aperture to my Pixma, first having set up the proofing profile to aRGB.

AceCo55

If you send a photo with aRGB colour space to the vast majority of printer it will convert it to sRGB.
The conversion MAY produce colour shifts.
The convention seems to be work in aRGB colour space and then convert to the appropriate colour space for your output - you can then see if it will render as you expect and if not, make necessary changes.

Me ... I just work in sRGB (yes, the sky is going to fall down and civilization as we know it will cease!!).
Why? The VAST majority of monitors, printers and print/publishing companies operate in a sRGB colour space - in fact I believe that aRGB devices have only been available in recent years to consumers. I don't need to complicate my like/workflow - KISS and I'm fairly sure the difference would be indiscernible to ME and the teenagers/parents who look at my photos!!

threeshoes

AceCo55 wrote: »

snip- in fact I believe that aRGB devices have only been available in recent years to consumers. I don't need to complicate my like/workflow - KISS and I'm fairly sure the difference would be indiscernible to ME and the teenagers/parents who look at my photos!!

Good points, although I've been using aRGB since I my first scans in about 2002. The most telling point, "difference indiscernible" :-)

AceCo55

threeshoes wrote: »

Good points, although I've been using aRGB since I my first scans in about 2002. The most telling point, "difference indiscernible" :-)

No ... the most telling point is "indiscernible TO ME"!!! Old man eyes!!