Working Color Space Setting on the M8

[photolandscape]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

10,000 shots and 11 months into using an M8, I just realized today that I have never considered what setting would be best for me to be using for my Working Color Space.

 

Mine has been set on sRGB since day one. If I'm using 1998 Adobe RGB as the color space on my printer, should I be using the same thing on the M8? Aside from the auto white balance issues, and needing to get my rangefinder checked and adjusted a bit, I have been very happy with the sorts of prints I've been making for the past several months. They are exceptionally good--dramatically better, in my opinion, to what I was getting with my Canon 1Ds.

 

Should I leave well enough alone, or consider selecting Adobe RGB as my Working Color Space on the M8?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[carstenw]

Adobe RGB is a larger colour space, and I believe that you will be able to capture colours which you can't capture with sRGB. On the other hand, the individual colours which can be recorded in Leica's pseudo-16 bit scheme would be further apart, leading to possibly posterization, ie. similar-coloured bands in the images. I have seen the latter maybe once or twice in 10000 images, so I choose more colours personally. Give it a try for a while and see what you get. Some of the extra colours in Adobe RGB are printable, by the way.

[Eoin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the setting of the colour space is only applicable to the jpgs when shooting Jpgs alone or only to the jpgs when shooting jpgs with raws. In raw mode the camera records raws in Adobe RGB regardless of what colour space is set in the menu. Well at least that's the way it appears to me, my jpgs have sRGB colour space for ease of use with quick web galleries and my raws are all adobe RGB when imported into various raw converters.

[Marquinius]

Being a pragmatic ... I just tried all three settings. Whatever you do, DNG's are in AdobeRGB. Leaves me wondering what ECI RGB really does. I mean, I know about colour spaces, but what would it practically do while printing (on in my case a 2400).

 

Another one for a rainy day.

[stunsworth]

The DNG file is colour space independent, the default presented when converting may be Adobe 98, but any of the others can be selected during conversion. That's my understanding but I'm happy to be corrected.

[Mauribix]

...leading to possibly posterization, ie. similar-coloured bands in the images...

 

I've alwayes shoot with Adobe-RGB settings, and alwayes converted DNG with Adobe Clolour Space, and i find the result that that kind of problem is alwayes due to sharpening and noise reduction...

It usually shows up with real clean sky.

Maybe it's just my impression!

 

cheers

 

Maurizio

[ndjambrose]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The DNG file is colour space independent, the default presented when converting may be Adobe 98, but any of the others can be selected during conversion. That's my understanding but I'm happy to be corrected.

 

My understanding also. Whatever colour space you select in camera affects the JPGs only. You can choose the colour space for the DNG file when you process it.

[Shootist]

The DNG file is colour space independent, the default presented when converting may be Adobe 98, but any of the others can be selected during conversion. That's my understanding but I'm happy to be corrected.

NO need for correction, you are totally right.

IF you shoot DNG only then the color space is assigned when converting (Processing) the DNG to TIFF/PSD/whatever.

Same goes for sharpness and constrast. In fact you can't even select either of those as they are greyed out.

[carstenw]

I didn't realise that the colour space only applied to JPG. All the better.

 

That doesn't mean that DNG is colour space independent though. The DNG has numerical values in it for colours, and those numerical values must be on *some* scale. I presume that this is then Adobe RGB, since Leica has no control over how they are converted in various raw programs. I would like to see Leica go to full 16-bit DNGs with Pro Photo RGB for the M9...

[stunsworth]

ProPhoto is already one of the colour spaces available when converting DNGs in CS3.

[carstenw]

Yes, but if the capture is in Adobe RGB, converting to Pro Photo RGB in the conversion won't allow you to record the extra colours possible in Pro Photo RGB, it will only allow modifications to spill over into the larger regions. I want some of the M8's sensitivity in certain parts of the spectrum to actually make it into the recorded image.

[ChrisC]

Yes, but if the capture is in Adobe RGB, converting to Pro Photo RGB in the conversion won't allow you to record the extra colours possible in Pro Photo RGB.

 

Carsten - The capture is not 'in' ARGB, though the in-camera Jpeg conversion might be. The RAW file is colour space independent until it is brought into an elected colour space at the point of conversion. As I understand it, the colour capture of the M8 exceeds ARGB, so ARGB would clip M8 files; so a suitably larger colour space might be preferred as a working space. Prophoto is a considerably larger space than ARGB. The conventional recommendation is to use a colour space which just covers the colour capture of the originating medium. Others on this forum, as indeed I do, like converting into Joe Holmes working spaces because they are not excessively large.

 

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

[carstenw]

An image cannot be in no colour space. If it is not in Adobe RGB, then it must be in something like "M8 RGB". Think about it: the file consists of numbers, one per pixel. What is the scale of this number? There can be no such thing as a unitless colour.

[Paul_S]

I didn't realise that the colour space only applied to JPG. (...)

That doesn't mean that DNG is colour space independent though. The DNG has numerical values in it for colours, and those numerical values must be on *some* scale.(...)

 

Any raw file format -which includes DNG- has for each pixel basically 2 types of information:

1. luminance or brightness
   
2. color filter which is on top of that pixel
   

There is no RGB channel information yet, therefore the concept of color space does not apply. Some programs indicate a working color space to raw data but this in not correct and confusing.

Raw file converters compute that single brightness value of a pixel to three (!) color values: R, G and B. It does this while taking into account the color filter for that pixel, color filter + brightness value of surrounding pixels, white balance value (user adjustable) and the color space the RGB file will be put into (or: relate to).

[For simplicity I leave out all other corrections like exposure correction, contrast and so on].

Due to the size of the sensor's color gamut, choosing a larger color space during conversion preserves more information. In general it is better to reduce color space when preparing for it's final goal, whether it be web/screen, print, ...

 

So there is NO color space related to raw file format, due to absence of RGB channel information. Therefore it is correct that you cannot set the working color space on the M8 when working in DNG only (called Color Management in M8-menu).

 

Hope this helps.

[BerndReini]

I was fairly certain that ProPhotoRGB is a much larger color space than AdobeRGB. You should always use the largest color space the device can handle and then soft proof for the output.

[BerndReini]

Ok, I don't want to quote other sources, but if you do a search for Adobe vs. ProPhotoRGB, you will find many sources that confirm that ProPhoto has a much larger Gamut. Even though most printers only print in 8Bit Mode, you still want to start out with 16Bit images right? The same with your color space. The bigger the better for all the initial adjustments.

[mjh]

An image cannot be in no colour space. If it is not in Adobe RGB, then it must be in something like "M8 RGB". Think about it: the file consists of numbers, one per pixel. What is the scale of this number? There can be no such thing as a unitless colour.

Raw data are in a device-dependent colour space defined by the sensor . This colour space bears no simple relationship to Adobe RGB, sRGB or whatever device-independent colour space one might choose as a goal for conversion. And it’s not even some kind of RGB colour space, as there are no true RGB data in a raw file.

[carstenw]

Raw data are in a device-dependent colour space defined by the sensor . This colour space bears no simple relationship to Adobe RGB, sRGB or whatever device-independent colour space one might choose as a goal for conversion. And it’s not even some kind of RGB colour space, as there are no true RGB data in a raw file.

 

Right, there is both a colour space defined by the capabilties of the sensor, and there are units, whether they be artifical or based on physics.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paul_S]

Since this is becoming a true color management thread , I would like to add that a fully color managed workflow - to start with a calibrated monitor - is mandatory for working with larger working spaces like AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. If you do not have a color managed workflow, you get better results when sticking with sRGB.

 

For Windows users please be aware that besides color managed applications like Photoshop (v7 and later), it can only show appropriate colors of sRGB images.

 

If you work color managed and use a working space like AdobeRGB - and you configured your Photoshop accordingly - you should always be aware of it and convert your images to other color spaces when needed (for web, presentation or for print from the printshop: sRGB most of the time).

 

Please also note that most monitors can only show a sRGB sized color space and simulate larger color spaces like AdobeRGB through rendering (unless you have a >4K euro monitor like the Eizo CG221). Nothing wrong with that, just to understand your limitations

 

Don't want to sound negative, but I like to put things in perspective. Don't go AdobeRGB if your monitor is not even calibrated with it's own (recent) profile. Same for your printer.

[woodyspedden]

Paul

 

You are correct that getting a monitor that can display the entire Adobe RGB color space is an expensive proposition. However I just bought the Eizo CZ224 and the price was only $2300 so things are getting a bit better.

 

Woody Spedden

 

By the way I consider the purchase of the Eizo a great investment. Since all of my work ends as a (usually large) print displaying the larger gamut of colors on the monitor gets me much closer to a WYSIWYG environment.

 

Since this is becoming a true color management thread , I would like to add that a fully color managed workflow - to start with a calibrated monitor - is mandatory for working with larger working spaces like AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. If you do not have a color managed workflow, you get better results when sticking with sRGB.

 

For Windows users please be aware that besides color managed applications like Photoshop (v7 and later), it can only show appropriate colors of sRGB images.

 

If you work color managed and use a working space like AdobeRGB - and you configured your Photoshop accordingly - you should always be aware of it and convert your images to other color spaces when needed (for web, presentation or for print from the printshop: sRGB most of the time).

 

Please also note that most monitors can only show a sRGB sized color space and simulate larger color spaces like AdobeRGB through rendering (unless you have a >4K euro monitor like the Eizo CG221). Nothing wrong with that, just to understand your limitations

 

Don't want to sound negative, but I like to put things in perspective. Don't go AdobeRGB if your monitor is not even calibrated with it's own (recent) profile. Same for your printer.