Color Space Question

Ok here's another question. When I send a pic to the web without converting from rgb to srgb the pic will look muddy and dull, but when I convert a pic in PS to srgb from rgb, there is the slightest of difference. Why is that?
 
I guess that some of us don't value simplicity over quality and some do, though I think the comparison is between simple and even simpler. Anyway, I think that there's enough information in this thread about the two approaches for readers to make their own minds up.

If you view an Adobe RGB image as if it was an sRGB image (ie the software ignores the profile tag) the colours will appear subdued because the Adobe RGB colour space is larger than the sRGB colour space. You are seeing the difference in the space. It's as if you drew a design on a balloon then let some of the air out - the balloon gets smaller and so does the design.

Converting from Adobe RGB to sRGB in Photoshop or any other colour managed application is like copying the design from a large balloon to a smaller one. The design will look about the same, but some bits might be missing or distorted where the design is larger than the small balloon.

Best,
Helen
 
After reading this thread again, and a two-hour chat with a color managed friend, everything is much clearer.

I wasn't aware of Firefox 3 either!
 
i don't value simplicity over quality...i just don't see a quality benefit in using AdobeRGB. all i see is a hassle and room for error.

i used AdobeRGB for a few months and decided, without a doubt, it offered me ZERO benefit in color quality or range. everywhere I print uses sRGB. everywhere I want to share my photos (other than my own monitor at the time) uses sRGB. i can't see ANY benefit in using Adobe.

like i said before, unless you KNOW your printer is using AdobeRGB, sRGB is the way to go.

for 99% of photographers, sRGB does the job. using Adobe just adds unnecessary complications, IMO. also, converting from one colorspace to another can cause image degradation----afterall, it's a mathematical equation and requires rounding off of values

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-debate.html
 
That's a good article, thanks for posting it. It helps people make their own minds up rather than telling them what to do. We aren't in any disagreement here.

Here are some quotes from it:

"So which is better? As with many things, the answer is, "it depends." You have to step back to ask "better for what?"

"Many online photo printers deal exclusively in sRGB since that is the lowest common denominator. I'm guessing they have judged that keeping things simple minimizes the customer service and support issues they have to deal with, lowering their costs. But that doesn't mean you have to let them dictate how you shoot. Just be sure to follow their rules and convert things accordingly before you send them images to print."


All good advice.

The main reason for me to have my own inkjet printers is because I can produce higher quality work from them than I can get from all but the best (and most expensive) commercial printing services. For me it is a simplicity vs quality issue, and I think that my clients appreciate that.

Best,
Helen
 
This Post is mostly for Helen's benefit.

Inkjets are great, but there is still one issue with them that has yet to be resolved. From my reading on the subject that has to do with a little problem called out gassing.

Just something to be aware of if you plan on displaying your prints behind glass for any length of time. You'll have have to take the entire thing apart to clean the glass from time to time.

The problem seems to come into play whenever you are using an RC type paper, like gloss, luster, semi matte, matte. Most people use higher end rag to print on to avoid this problem, but then the costs can get out of control.

Helen, you are dead on when in essence you say it's the best affordable solution.

Other than those issues they're great & easy to use.

Lilly
 

Most reactions

New Topics

Back
Top