A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital SLR Cameras
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Setting color profile in camera??



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 5th 07, 03:13 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
stormlady
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Setting color profile in camera??

Hi all,

So I'm taking a photography course with one of our local photographers
and as part of the course, we covered in camera color profiles. His
recommendation was to set the camera to Adobe RGB as opposed to sRGB.
He said it is more of an industry standard, or something like that, a
more true color rendition because it has more actual colors available
to it.

Then on Saturday, DBf attends a photography workshop at the local
camera store, and they recommend the exact opposite, to keep the
camera in sRGB instead of adobe RGB.

So now I'm confused about what it should be, s or adobe RGB. Is one
really better than the other?

FWIW, I took pretty much the same shot with both settings, and the
adobe seemed to be more saturated, the other looked a little washed
out.

Thanks
Heather

  #2  
Old March 5th 07, 05:26 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Karl Winkler
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 68
Default Setting color profile in camera??

On Mar 5, 7:13 am, "stormlady" wrote:
Hi all,

So I'm taking a photography course with one of our local photographers
and as part of the course, we covered in camera color profiles. His
recommendation was to set the camera to Adobe RGB as opposed to sRGB.
He said it is more of an industry standard, or something like that, a
more true color rendition because it has more actual colors available
to it.

Then on Saturday, DBf attends a photography workshop at the local
camera store, and they recommend the exact opposite, to keep the
camera in sRGB instead of adobe RGB.

So now I'm confused about what it should be, s or adobe RGB. Is one
really better than the other?

FWIW, I took pretty much the same shot with both settings, and the
adobe seemed to be more saturated, the other looked a little washed
out.

Thanks
Heather


Heather, I'm no expert on the subject, but here's what I've come to
understand. sRGB is a slightly reduced-gamut color profile that is
useful when you expect your pictures to be viewed in a variety of
ways, such as on web sites, where browsers support this profile but
may not support other profiles. With the right tweaking, it can look
fairly good but as you have discovered, it is not as saturated as
Adobe RGB.

Adobe RGB is a wider-gamut profile allowing certain colors to be more
saturated. I have been using this profile in Photoshop for my own
printing for several years and I've been happy with it. I keep my
files in Adobe RGB from the camera (Nikon D200) through Photoshop and
then let the printer rip the image. This seems to preserve the best
colors. I have not noticed any problems with saving JPG files with
this embedded profile and then viewing them on the web. I'm not sure
if this is because web browsers now support this profile, or if they
just convert it to sRGB or what.

Offset printing with four color (CMYK) has less gamut than RGB and so
if you do intend to have photos printed offset (such as for calendars,
magazines, etc.) then you may want to convert them to CMYK as a last
step. You will lose saturation in this step, especially in the blues.
However, I'm sure you can see with magazines and calendars, when
offset printing preparation is done correctly, the colors are plenty
saturated.

I hope this helps.

-Karl
http://www.karlwinkler.com

  #3  
Old March 5th 07, 05:28 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Scott W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,131
Default Setting color profile in camera??

On Mar 5, 4:13 am, "stormlady" wrote:
Hi all,

So I'm taking a photography course with one of our local photographers
and as part of the course, we covered in camera color profiles. His
recommendation was to set the camera to Adobe RGB as opposed to sRGB.
He said it is more of an industry standard, or something like that, a
more true color rendition because it has more actual colors available
to it.

Then on Saturday, DBf attends a photography workshop at the local
camera store, and they recommend the exact opposite, to keep the
camera in sRGB instead of adobe RGB.

So now I'm confused about what it should be, s or adobe RGB. Is one
really better than the other?

FWIW, I took pretty much the same shot with both settings, and the
adobe seemed to be more saturated, the other looked a little washed
out.


The uses for sRGB and Adobe RGB are a big different, for displaying on
a computer sRGB is by far the best.
In some cases for printing Adobe RGB can be better, but only if the
people doing the printing can handle that color space, not all can.

The best solution in my mind is to just shoot raw, then you can
convert to either color space as needed.


Scott



  #4  
Old March 5th 07, 05:38 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,367
Default Setting color profile in camera??

stormlady wrote:
Hi all,

So I'm taking a photography course with one of our local photographers
and as part of the course, we covered in camera color profiles. His
recommendation was to set the camera to Adobe RGB as opposed to sRGB.
He said it is more of an industry standard, or something like that, a
more true color rendition because it has more actual colors available
to it.

Then on Saturday, DBf attends a photography workshop at the local
camera store, and they recommend the exact opposite, to keep the
camera in sRGB instead of adobe RGB.

So now I'm confused about what it should be, s or adobe RGB. Is one
really better than the other?

FWIW, I took pretty much the same shot with both settings, and the
adobe seemed to be more saturated, the other looked a little washed
out.


With adobe, you need to use a color managed program to view the files
like photoshop and you need to convert to sRGB for posting to the web so
it can be kind of a hassle but yes adobe has a larger gamut so that very
intense saturated colors are less prone to posterization especially when
manipulating further. Some people argue that sRGB 'looks' more saturated
and vibrant, I'm not sure about that, perhaps adobe is more subtle but
the point is you can crank up the saturation without harm.
  #5  
Old March 5th 07, 05:53 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
stormlady
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Setting color profile in camera??

On Mar 5, 1:38 pm, Paul Furman wrote:

With adobe, you need to use a color managed program to view the files
like photoshop and you need to convert to sRGB for posting to the web so
it can be kind of a hassle but yes adobe has a larger gamut so that very
intense saturated colors are less prone to posterization especially when
manipulating further. Some people argue that sRGB 'looks' more saturated
and vibrant, I'm not sure about that, perhaps adobe is more subtle but
the point is you can crank up the saturation without harm.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -



Now I think I'm more confused. I shot a concert this weekend, with
the D80, in adobe RGB, and I just opened the files with the windows
viewer and looked at them with that. Then I picked a few and posted
them to a binaries newsgroup that I subscribe to. Everything seemed
to work fine, and other people saw the pictures.

I don't have a copy of Photoshop (unfortunately) and am not really
able to get one due to the prohibitive cost involved. Which is also
the reason that I don't shoot in RAW, even though I would prefer to do
that.

  #6  
Old March 5th 07, 07:16 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
jhthurman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15
Default Setting color profile in camera??

This seems to be an age-old issue, almost religious to some folks. As
another poster noted, if you just shoot RAW, you can re-assign color spaces,
depending on the use you put the image to. There are all sorts of free RAW
processors out on the web, just look around. If Photoshop is too expensive
for now, check out PaintShop Pro (lower cost) or GIMP (free).

Free RAW processor: http://www.silkypix.com

Here's a good, simple article that talks about Adobe RBG vs. sRGB:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm

Good luck and happy shooting...


"stormlady" wrote in message
ps.com...
Hi all,

So I'm taking a photography course with one of our local photographersa
and as part of the course, we covered in camera color profiles. His
recommendation was to set the camera to Adobe RGB as opposed to sRGB.
He said it is more of an industry standard, or something like that, a
more true color rendition because it has more actual colors available
to it.

Then on Saturday, DBf attends a photography workshop at the local
camera store, and they recommend the exact opposite, to keep the
camera in sRGB instead of adobe RGB.

So now I'm confused about what it should be, s or adobe RGB. Is one
really better than the other?

FWIW, I took pretty much the same shot with both settings, and the
adobe seemed to be more saturated, the other looked a little washed
out.

Thanks
Heather



  #7  
Old March 5th 07, 07:41 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Scott W
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,131
Default Setting color profile in camera??

On Mar 5, 6:53 am, "stormlady" wrote:
On Mar 5, 1:38 pm, Paul Furman wrote:

With adobe, you need to use a color managed program to view the files
like photoshop and you need to convert to sRGB for posting to the web so
it can be kind of a hassle but yes adobe has a larger gamut so that very
intense saturated colors are less prone to posterization especially when
manipulating further. Some people argue that sRGB 'looks' more saturated
and vibrant, I'm not sure about that, perhaps adobe is more subtle but
the point is you can crank up the saturation without harm.- Hide quoted text -


- Show quoted text -


Now I think I'm more confused. I shot a concert this weekend, with
the D80, in adobe RGB, and I just opened the files with the windows
viewer and looked at them with that. Then I picked a few and posted
them to a binaries newsgroup that I subscribe to. Everything seemed
to work fine, and other people saw the pictures.

I don't have a copy of Photoshop (unfortunately) and am not really
able to get one due to the prohibitive cost involved. Which is also
the reason that I don't shoot in RAW, even though I would prefer to do
that.


If you don't have Photoshop then I would only work in sRGB.

Scott

  #8  
Old March 5th 07, 07:59 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,367
Default Setting color profile in camera??

Scott W wrote:
On Mar 5, 6:53 am, "stormlady" wrote:

On Mar 5, 1:38 pm, Paul Furman wrote:


With adobe, you need to use a color managed program to view the files
like photoshop and you need to convert to sRGB for posting to the web so
it can be kind of a hassle but yes adobe has a larger gamut so that very
intense saturated colors are less prone to posterization especially when
manipulating further. Some people argue that sRGB 'looks' more saturated
and vibrant, I'm not sure about that, perhaps adobe is more subtle but
the point is you can crank up the saturation without harm.- Hide quoted text -


Now I think I'm more confused. I shot a concert this weekend, with
the D80, in adobe RGB, and I just opened the files with the windows
viewer and looked at them with that. Then I picked a few and posted
them to a binaries newsgroup that I subscribe to. Everything seemed
to work fine, and other people saw the pictures.


It doesn't look that bad but adobeRGB will look a little bit washed out
usually without color management.

This shot I forgot to convert to sRGB:
http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=California/Bay-Area/Peninsula/sweeney-ridge/2007-03-04&PG=3&PIC=13
This one I remembered & the red shirts are a bit more vibrant:
http://www.edgehill.net/1/?SC=go.php&DIR=California/Bay-Area/Peninsula/sweeney-ridge/2007-03-04&PG=3&PIC=14
I run most of those through a bach action to resize & convert but those
I wanted at a different size.

I don't have a copy of Photoshop (unfortunately) and am not really
able to get one due to the prohibitive cost involved. Which is also
the reason that I don't shoot in RAW, even though I would prefer to do
that.


If you don't have Photoshop then I would only work in sRGB.


You can probably afford PS elements though. And if you shoot RAW, you
can choose the color space after the fact. It's a good idea to shoot RAW
plus jpeg if you can afford the time & storage space, just in case you
get a really great image that you want to enlarge or need to make major
adjustments to correct, recover highlights, brighten the shadows, etc.
Just save the RAW files for your favorite images and you can come back
later when you decide to make some nice prints and have learned how to
post process better.
  #9  
Old March 5th 07, 08:00 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,367
Default Setting color profile in camera??

jhthurman wrote:

If Photoshop is too expensive
for now, check out PaintShop Pro (lower cost) or GIMP (free).


I'm not sure GIMP is color managed though it is supposed to be quite good.
  #10  
Old March 5th 07, 08:04 PM posted to rec.photo.digital.slr-systems
Paul Furman
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 7,367
Default Setting color profile in camera??

Scott W wrote:

The uses for sRGB and Adobe RGB are a big different, for displaying on
a computer sRGB is by far the best.
In some cases for printing Adobe RGB can be better, but only if the
people doing the printing can handle that color space, not all can.


Modern ink jet printers have a pretty large gamut, which can take
advantage of adobeRGB but yes it's true that you really won't see the
difference on a monitor, except maybe after making adjustments. It's not
a huge big deal, just a little improvement possible.

The best solution in my mind is to just shoot raw, then you can
convert to either color space as needed.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Color profile question Nathan Gutman Digital Photography 10 January 28th 07 06:58 PM
How to use color profile from photolab?? Pablo 3style Digital SLR Cameras 15 February 10th 06 10:16 AM
How to use color profile from photolab???? Pablo3style Digital Photography 0 February 4th 06 04:05 PM
Color Profile, ICC, sRGB????? Josh Digital Photography 10 January 17th 05 07:22 PM
Color Profile, ICC, sRGB????? Josh Digital Photography 0 January 17th 05 03:00 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:30 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.