Adobe RGB or sRGB with M8?

[Englander]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Phillip,

Yes, the number one rule is to have fun. I mean it.

 

But, from experience I can tell you that it is no fun to discover that you have ruined something that you want and could have preserved intact.

 

I look at RAW as I used to look at negatives or transparencies: preserve as best you can from any deterioration. If working with RAW is too burdensome or time consuming, then you should not do it; but I really really suggest that you take advantage of shooting RAW +JPG and save the RAW for some future date. Or if you are using a camera that does not allow both, shoot RAW and use a batch processor to get your JPEGs while preserving your original files.

 

RAW processing is like darkroom work; lots of great photographers never have done any. It isn't a necessity, for sure. The sainted C-B never did. But you can bet that he and all the greats and hopefuls all try to preserve their original negatives or files.

 

Someday you might want them and all it takes is disc space to save them. The difference between the RAW processors available to day and what were available just a couple of years ago is tremendous and I have already run some of my older files through new software. Unlike negatives, I can re-develop an older already developed image with newer and better software or newly learned techniques as long as I have the RAW file. If you save only the JPEG--which isn't all that great an algorithm and is soon to be replaced--it is like only having a print or a Polaroid and wanting to get another or a better print some years after it was made.

 

I guess this is a long way of saying, go ahead and shoot JPEG if that's what you like but why not just keep the RAWs in case you want them sometime in the future. If ultimately you don't want them later, they are really easy to throw out.

 

Can you tell that I threw away some chromes I should have preserved?

 

Joe

[ChrisC]

Philip - Your description of colour spaces larger than a monitor's sRGB as blind flying does not really describe the process, perhaps a better way of describing it is that there is more colour information available than the monitor allows us to see. In my workflow from file, to on screen image, to Epson printer, the limitations of sRGB is in some ways the weak link in that chain. Does it make sense to work to the colour space that is the weakest in the chain?

 

For what it's worth I know two very accomplished technical photographers who pay far less attention to the screen appearance of images, than they do to the RGB numbers of colours in their images; both could work with a monitor giving a colour caste.

 

....................Chris

[DaveSee]

Theres's a link for you too.

 

RAW vs JPG

 

You can substitute RAW by DNG, its in principle in this context the same.

 

Yikes! Mr. Rockwell sure hates RAW files... here is a site that includes both the RAW/DNG and colorpace discussions. There are many good sites, even Ken's perspective is good... but he really misses the biggest point: the colorspace(s) and JPEG "engine" hardcoded in the camera produce a reasonable file, but more like a polaroid than a negative or slide. His comments on "proprietary", "huge", and "slow to convert" are no longer true... well, except for the size issue You can't to much with the Polaroid once peeled from its goo...

 

I have a script that permits me to choose between sRGB and AdobeRGB, and TIFF, JPEG or TIFF & JPEG file output. The JPEG is set for a 30% of original size: takes about 40 secs to produce both the TIFF and JPEG from one M8 DNG.(1GHz CPU)... would say that's reasonable too. And I have a "Digital NeGative" too

 

rgds,

Dave

[gravastar]

As an aside, recording in JPEG and DNG at least doubles the time taken to write to the SD card. Those 8 seconds soon mount up if you take several shots in quick succession. If possible I only use DNG unless JPEGs are needed immediately, ie. time critical. That way I've got the maximum amount of information to manipulate the image.

 

Bob.

[scho]

If you do much grayscale conversion the it would be advantageous to use a color space that matches your grayscale gamma. I use Adobe because it is gamma 2.2 and my gray work space is gray gamma 2.2.

[gepetto]

Has any one used the CIE RGB color space the M8 can capture in. This colorspace is even bigger than AdobeRGB. The CIE color standard was set up back in 1931 by the French.

 

I know many people say setting color space in camera doesn't make a difference when shooting RAW files as it can be changed later but I don't think this is entirely true. If your camera is set to capture sRGB then you change the RAW file to AdobeRGB the color will shift from the original capture.

 

As an example the D-LUX 3 uses sRGB IEC61966-2.1. Changing the a DLUX3 file to AdobeRGB adds color that was not recorded originally. Like up sampling an image information is just made up to fill the gaps.

 

This link comparing sRGB-AdobeRGB1998 suggest that "AdobeRGB working space encompasses roughly 50% of the visible colors specified by CIE-- improving upon sRGB's gamut primarily in cyan-greens." That implies that the CIE RGB color space could have 50% more gamut than AdobeRGB.

 

If I owned an M8 I think I would want it to capture as much color gradation as possible at the point of exposure rather than changing it later.

[Larko]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

there is a very interesting article on this that recommends neither sRGB or RGB(1998) an intersting read http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml

[albertknappmd]

I agree that prophoto is presently limited by the printer's capabilities. I use Adobe RGB exclusively from RAW conversion through CS2 processing. Then convert to CMYK for printing or sRGB for web work.

[woodyspedden]

Well said Joe on expanding that down to working in PS.

I personally use Joseph Holmes D3

 

I did a printing workshop with Joseph Holmes who explained that you want to work in a space which holds all the colors your sensor can handle, but no more or no less. He has thus developed five different spaces to allow you freedom of choice. I personally use DCam4 which seems to be ideal for the M8.

 

Woody

[Guest guy_mancuso]

Woody did he tell you the Dcam 4 to use on the M8. i will switch if that is the case , i have them both