Understanding monitor/printer profiles?

Started Nov 8, 2012 | Discussions thread
Hugowolf
Forum ProPosts: 11,194
Like?
Re: Flushing data down the toilet
In reply to rpenmanparker, Nov 19, 2012

rpenmanparker wrote:

I liken your recommendation to the early days of digital instruments when folks were recording data like temperatures with 10 decimal places. The last eight places were outside the capability of the thermometer or other instrument, just an artifact within error limits and without any real meaning. But folks were insisting they knew the result to 10 places. You are insisting you have 65,536 shades of each color, but when it really matters - output time - you don't. And you are not the one who made the selections of what you really do have.

Quite the opposite in fact. Using sRGB as your working space (not output space) is more akin to having ten decimal places, chopping them down to one decimal place, to doing lots of arithmetic operations on them, and then expecting the result to still be accurate to one decimal place.

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml

http://www.outbackphoto.com/color_management/cm_06/essay.html

http://www.earthboundlight.com/phototips/prophoto-rgb.html

Brian A

What I am trying to figure out is this: how do I work in Pro Photo RGB, and make abolutely sure that the image that I settle on after all editing will the be image on my printed page.

There are colors in sRGB that your printer cannot reproduce. There are colors that your printer can produce that are outside sRGB. The same goes for AdobeRGB.

You can view monitor out-of-gamut warnings in Lightroom. You can view output (printer profile) out-of-gamut warnings in Lightroom. You can soft proof in Lightroom using each rendering intent, but a soft proof is just an approximation of the output. If you want to be absolutely sure what it will look like, nothing beats a hard proof – it doesn't have to be full sized.

My early attempts at this were not encouraging. Can you assure me that the work flow you recommend will not produce peculiar colors due to the rendering intents.

I cannot assure you of anything of the sort, although I have never had what I would call peculiar colors due to rendering intents. If I have out of gamut colors, then I sometimes prefer the way one intent renders compared to the other. I have, for instance, had dark greens really muddy up to a khaki green/brown with Hahnemühle Photo Rag 308. But I have had that happen with sRGB jpegs, raw, canned profiles, custom profiles, perceptual, and relative colorimetric. One of a few reasons why I switched to Canson Rag Photographique 310.

Bob Petruska, whom I respect immensely, suggests that it is very difficult if not impossible to do.

I respect Bob too, but I don't always agree with him. And clearly I totally disagree with him on this one.

What is your take on this question?

My take has already been stated: to work in eight bit sRGB is a reduction in computational accuracy, and as far as final output goes, it would reduce the gamut of my printers; a feature for which I paid dearly.

I am not trying to convince you either way. If you find sRGB easier to work with then fine. But that is not the only way, and clearly many others prefer to work in a wider space.

Brian A

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow