sRGB or not?

Kory Lidstrom

I know this is a really basic question, but it just occured to me that after all this time I might be doing things wrong.

The question is: are we supposed to be uploading photos that are in PRINTABLE galleries in sRGB format or not?

Since joining SmugMug back in April, I've been uploading ALL photos to all of my galleries in regular Adobe RGB color space. My reasoning is that when customers order prints, they should obviously NOT be in sRGB as that is not really the right color space for printing.

So far, I haven't had any complaints from any customers, but frankly, none of them are photographers and they may not know whether the colors in a particular photo are off or not.

I have ordered some test prints for myself, and they all looked pretty darn good, except for some of the reds, they appeared a bit washed out, but nothing too bad. I'm not sure if that's just the way the cookie crumbles or what.

Thanks for reading, and for any help you can give.

Andy

http://www.smugmug.com/help/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-1998

And we convert your aRGB files to sRGB anyhow - aRGB can't be viewed on the web properly, and our lab can't print your prints

So from now on, sRGB please

Kory Lidstrom

Thanks for the uber-quick response as usual, Andy.

But, I still have a question.

Currently, the color space setting on my 5D is set to Adobe RGB. What I've been doing all this time is uploading my shots to SmugMug, and then SmugMug -- unbeknownst to me until now -- has been converting my shots to sRGB.

Now that I know that you guys need sRGB, I'll be happy to convert them for you. The easy way would be to simply convert them to SRGB in Photoshop's slick Image Processor at the same time I'm converting them to jpegs in preparation for uploading.

HOWEVER, according to the link you posted, it's better to have my camera set to sRGB so that they are sRGB right from the start. The thing is, that goes against everything I've ever been taught. I'm not saying that thread you posted is wrong, I'm just asking:

Is it really better to set my camera to sRGB? I always thought you should keep it in Adobe RGB so you don't lose any colors.

Put another way: will there be any difference between converting the shots in Image Processor vs. doing it in-camera?

Thanks again!

Andy

NugBlazer wrote:

The thing is, that goes against everything I've ever been taught.

And why were you taught this?

Are you printing at home? Then aRGB will be useful.

Shoot RAW, then you have all the data

Kory Lidstrom

Doh! ... oh man... I feel dumb now. The thing is I do shoot RAW. Always. Which, now that I think about it, means that the camera's color space setting doesn't matter. Is that right? If so, then silly me.

Yes, I do print at home sometimes. But, like I said, if shooting RAW, it doesn't matter what the camera is set at, does it?

(Man, sometimes I HATE keeping all this darn color management stuff straight. I'm a photographer, not a printmaster! I just wanna shoot!!! Z.)

jfriend

NugBlazer wrote:

Doh! ... oh man... I feel dumb now. The thing is I do shoot RAW. Always. Which, now that I think about it, means that the camera's color space setting doesn't matter. Is that right? If so, then silly me.

Yes, I do print at home sometimes. But, like I said, if shooting RAW, it doesn't matter what the camera is set at, does it?

(Man, sometimes I HATE keeping all this darn color management stuff straight. I'm a photographer, not a printmaster! I just wanna shoot!!! Z.)

Just to complete the thoughts here. You are right. When you shoot RAW, it does not matter whether the camera is set to sRGB or AdobeRGB. The RAW data is recorded in the hardware-specific colorspace of the camera sensor and then it's converted to a colorspace of your choice in your favorite RAW processor when you process the RAW file into something else.

When creating JPEGs, what colorspace is best to use depends on where the JPEG is going. Here are the rules I recommend:

1. If you really don't understand colorspaces yet, stick to sRGB because you can't make a big mistake by sending an sRGB JPEG somewhere. Everything (screen, printers, browsers, email clients, etc...) can handle an sRGB image. Sending a non-sRGB file to something that can't handle it will really mess up your image. As a good test of your knowledge, you should now the difference between assigning a profile to an image and converting an image to a particular profile.
2. If your image is destined for the web, it must be sRGB. There are some browsers who know about colorspaces, but most browsers do not look at the colorspace and assume it's sRGB. If the image is not sRGB, your colors will be rendered wrong. Usually, they will end up looking pale and washed out.
3. If your image is destined directly for an online lab, find out what colorspaces they accept. A few will accept AdobeRGB, but many will not. Nearly all will accept sRGB. If you feel like you understand colorspaces and you've confirmed that your lab will accept AdobeRGB, then you may be able to print a larger colorspace by using AdobeRGB (though it will only matter on some images). Using the wrong colorspace will mess up way, way, way more than you could ever gain by eeking out the extra colors of AdobeRGB, so you HAVE to make sure you don't use the wrong one.
4. If you are printing at home in a colorspace aware app (like Photoshop), you can pretty much use any colorspace that your software knows about and the driver software will map it to the colors of your local printer. Just because you use a larger colorspace for the image doesn't necessarily mean that you will be able to print more colors. That depends on the capabilities of your particular printer. Many home printers these days can print some colors that are beyond sRGB so some people like to do all home printing in AdobeRGB.
5. If you want to experiment with the larger colorspaces and actually use some of the broader colors, you should learn how to use soft proofing (in an app like Photoshop) with ICC profiles for the target device. This will help you understand whether the larger gamut colors you are attempting to use can actually be reproduced on the target printer or not. If they can't, you probably won't get the result you expect and may want to "fix" your image before sending it to the printer.

Kory Lidstrom

Thanks, jfriend, lots of good info there. I already knew most of it, but you condensed it nicely and made it a good refresher.

Ironically, the only part I wasn't sure about was where you said, "As a good test of your knowledge, you should now the difference between assigning a profile to an image and converting an image to a particular profile.".

Care to elaborate?

Thanks again.

jfriend

Convert vs. Assign

NugBlazer wrote:

Thanks, jfriend, lots of good info there. I already knew most of it, but you condensed it nicely and made it a good refresher.

Ironically, the only part I wasn't sure about was where you said, "As a good test of your knowledge, you should now the difference between assigning a profile to an image and converting an image to a particular profile.".

Care to elaborate?

Thanks again.

Oh, you want the answer to the quiz...?

OK. You can think of an image in two parts. First, there are the numbers in the image file that describe the color values of every pixel in the image. Then, there is some info in the file that describes what color recipe should be used to interpret those color numbers. sRGB, AdobeRGB, ProPhotoRGB area all different recipes and it's that recipe that determines what color a particular numberic RGB value like (200, 100, 50) actually represents.

When you assign a profile to an image, you change the labelled recipe value (the colorspace), but don't change the actual color numbers. You only use "Assign" when the image is missing a profile and you need to label it with the correct one or when you know that it's labeled with an incorrect profile. So, if you had an image that for some errant reason had numbers that are actually sRGB, but the labeled profile said AdobeRGB, then to fix this image, you don't need to change the color numbers, you just need to "assign" the proper profile to the image.

On the other hand, if you have a fully proper image who's numbers and profile label match each other and you want the change the image to be in a different color profile, then you "convert" it to a different profile. Let's suppose you had an AdobeRGB image and you want to convert it to be an sRGB image. When you choose "Convert to sRGB Profile", your software actually goes in and changes the color numbers in the file so that a pixel that is a particular type of orangish-red in AdobeRGB is changed to a different numeric value that corresponds to that same color in sRGB (or as close as it can get). Since AdobeRGB and sRGB are different color recipes, a given color in one uses different numbers to describe it than describing it in the other. Thus when you "convert" from one profile to another, the actual numbers in the file have to get changed to match the new profile.

If you have a correctly labeled image and you assign a new profile to it, you will see significant color changes. That's because you are changing the color recipe, but not changing the color numbers. So, a given number interpreted with a new color recipe will show as a different color.

If you have a correctly labeled image and you convert it to a new profile, you will generally not see significant color changes. The one exception would be extreme colors that aren't available in the new colorspace. In that case, the colors get converted to something close to what it was that does exist in the new color space.

Kory Lidstrom

Ok I got it now. Yes, I knew the first paragraph. The next two paragraphs I only knew vaguely and your post was helpful. Thanks very much for taking the time to write such a throrough response.

In the end though, I haven't ever been affected by this stuff much because I never assign a color space, I only convert... and only when necessary of course.

So, in the end, the answer to my original question in this thread seems to be: just keep doing what I've been doing. Z.

jfriend

NugBlazer wrote:

Ok I got it now. Yes, I knew the first paragraph. The next two paragraphs I only knew vaguely and your post was helpful. Thanks very much for taking the time to write such a throrough response.

In the end though, I haven't ever been affected by this stuff much because I never assign a color space, I only convert... and only when necessary of course.

So, in the end, the answer to my original question in this thread seems to be: just keep doing what I've been doing. Z.

I'm just curious, if the main reason for making JPEGs is to put them on Smugmug, why are you making AdobeRGB JPEGs instead of sRGB JPEGs? I'd rather see my images exactly as they will be on my web site rather than let Smugmug convert them to sRGB for me and possibly introduce some changes that I haven't seen.

Kory Lidstrom

jfriend wrote:

I'm just curious, if the main reason for making JPEGs is to put them on Smugmug, why are you making AdobeRGB JPEGs instead of sRGB JPEGs? I'd rather see my images exactly as they will be on my web site rather than let Smugmug convert them to sRGB for me and possibly introduce some changes that I haven't seen.

Well, that was the whole point of this thread. Up until yesterday, I was making aRGB jpegs because that's what I thought we were supposed to do. Now that I know, I will always be making sRGB jpegs. See?

jfriend

NugBlazer wrote:

Well, that was the whole point of this thread. Up until yesterday, I was making aRGB jpegs because that's what I thought we were supposed to do. Now that I know, I will always be making sRGB jpegs. See?

SamirD

I hate to bump such an old thread, but one of the photographers I work with found that Bay Photo accepts aRGB, and because Bay gets the original file before printing, he's shooting in aRGB. What issues will this cause, if any?

jfriend

SamirD wrote: »

I hate to bump such an old thread, but one of the photographers I work with found that Bay Photo accepts aRGB, and because Bay gets the original file before printing, he's shooting in aRGB. What issues will this cause, if any?

I think Smugmug converts aRGB originals to sRGB automatically upon upload (at least they used to). If Smugmug permitted aRGB display files on the web, they would have washed out colors in any non-color-managed browser (like Chrome or IE).

Andy

SamirD wrote: »

I hate to bump such an old thread, but one of the photographers I work with found that Bay Photo accepts aRGB, and because Bay gets the original file before printing, he's shooting in aRGB. What issues will this cause, if any?

They still convert it on their end
We accept sRGB files for display and print.
http://www.smugmug.com/help/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-1998

SamirD

So basically any aRGB is converted to sRGB along the way?

According to this page on bayphoto's site, they accept sRGB and aRGB:
http://www.bayphoto.com/bayweb/pro_colormanage.htm

So are they converting everyone or just SM?

Andy

SamirD wrote: »

So basically any aRGB is converted to sRGB along the way?

According to this page on bayphoto's site, they accept sRGB and aRGB:
http://www.bayphoto.com/bayweb/pro_colormanage.htm

So are they converting everyone or just SM?

We convert the file, and so does Bay (unless they changed it). Dunno how much more clear I can be, Samir

SamirD

I guess I should've been more clear.

Has Bay changed their policy in relation to SM? If so, then I'm assuming the aRGB file would be converted to sRGB for all SM uses, and the original aRGB would be sent to Bay when an order comes in, correct? Or does Bay only process everything from SM in sRGB?

Allen

SamirD wrote: »

I guess I should've been more clear.

Has Bay changed their policy in relation to SM? If so, then I'm assuming the aRGB file would be converted to sRGB for all SM uses, and the original aRGB would be sent to Bay when an order comes in, correct? Or does Bay only process everything from SM in sRGB?

Uploads to SM are converted to sRGB so the originals that are used for prints
would be the sRGB's. SM would not have any aRGB's.

SamirD

Allen wrote: »

Uploads to SM are converted to sRGB so the originals that are used for prints
would be the sRGB's. SM would not have any aRGB's.

According to Andy's post, Bay is the one converting it. So which is it? SM or Bay?

An easy test would be to upload an aRGB file to SM and then download it again and compare it with the original. But I don't have any aRGB files to test with.

jfriend

SamirD wrote: »

According to Andy's post, Bay is the one converting it. So which is it? SM or Bay?

An easy test would be to upload an aRGB file to SM and then download it again and compare it with the original. But I don't have any aRGB files to test with.

Not sure where you're thinking Smugmug ever has anything other than sRGB. Smugmug has always converted incoming aRGB images to sRGB because if they don't the web display is horrid. The fact that Smugmug converts it upon upload renders Bay's policies or capabilities irrelevant to this disucssion. Smugmug always sends Bay an sRGB file because that's all Smugmug has.

In post #17, Andy says Smugmug converts it and the reference he points to in that post says this:

When Smugmug receives non-sRGB photos, what do you do?

We learned from hard experience to convert CMYK, Adobe 98, and ProPhoto images to sRGB. Otherwise they look bad both online and in print, benefitting no one.

PBolchover

SamirD wrote: »

According to Andy's post, Bay is the one converting it. So which is it? SM or Bay?

My reading of Andy's post is as follows:

• If you upload an aRGB file to Smugmug, then Smugmug will convert it to sRGB and send the sRGB to Bay Photo.
• If you directly upload an aRGB file to Bay Photo, then Bay Photo will convert it to sRGB before printing it.

SamirD

jfriend wrote: »

Not sure where you're thinking Smugmug ever has anything other than sRGB. Smugmug has always converted incoming aRGB images to sRGB because if they don't the web display is horrid. The fact that Smugmug converts it upon upload renders Bay's policies or capabilities irrelevant to this disucssion. Smugmug always sends Bay an sRGB file because that's all Smugmug has.

But then that means aRGB originals are being changed to sRGBs. I thought the original was always preserved, and only the web copies were sRGB?

If originals are being altered, then that clears it up for me. I just didn't think originals ever got messed with.

SamirD

The photographer called up Bay today and got this answer:

- Bay receives aRGBs from SM. So I'm guessing those originals aren't being touched, only the web images must be modified by SM.
- Bay processes the aRGBs and does not convert them to sRGB before working on them.

A bit muddy again.

Andy

SamirD wrote: »

But then that means aRGB originals are being changed to sRGBs. I thought the original was always preserved, and only the web copies were sRGB?

If originals are being altered, then that clears it up for me. I just didn't think originals ever got messed with.

This is the only case where we will alter - and we state that we'll convert it on our help page. I really don't know how much more plainly I can state this, Samir.... if I'm being daft let me know.

jfriend

SamirD wrote: »

The photographer called up Bay today and got this answer:

- Bay receives aRGBs from SM. So I'm guessing those originals aren't being touched, only the web images must be modified by SM.
- Bay processes the aRGBs and does not convert them to sRGB before working on them.

A bit muddy again.

Me thinks the person at Bay was mistaken on the first point.

Andy

SamirD wrote: »

The photographer called up Bay today and got this answer:

- Bay receives aRGBs from SM. So I'm guessing those originals aren't being touched, only the web images must be modified by SM.

Samir. We will NEVER EVER send an aRGB file to Bay. Let me be 100000000% Crystal Clear on this. Please. Can we call this done now?

SamirD

Andy wrote: »

This is the only case where we will alter - and we state that we'll convert it on our help page.

I didn't look at the help page. I guess that would've helped.

jfriend wrote: »

Me thinks the person at Bay was mistaken on the first point.

I think you're right. It would be nice if people didn't answer based on what they think the answer is versus the truth. "I don't know" is an acceptable answer if it's the truth.

Andy wrote: »

Samir. We will NEVER EVER send an aRGB file to Bay. Let me be 100000000% Crystal Clear on this. Please. Can we call this done now?

I won't bother you about this again. Sorry for asking.

Andy

SamirD wrote: »

I didn't look at the help page. I guess that would've helped.
I think you're right. It would be nice if people didn't answer based on what they think the answer is versus the truth. "I don't know" is an acceptable answer if it's the truth.
I won't bother you about this again. Sorry for asking.

It's never a bother - I just needed to be really clear, Samir, thanks!

Darter02

This thread sorted out my own color management question. Thanks!