sRGB vs Adobe RGB

[AdamW]

Hey folks--

I'm confused. Bryan Peterson and Scott Kelby both write that sRGB should be used if images are to be displayed on a computer, and that Adobe RGB is for images that will be printed on an inkjet. I've seen lots of stuff on the web that agrees with this, and other stuff that says it doesn't matter which you choose. The Canon XTi manual says that Adobe RGB "is mainly used for commercial printing and other industrial uses."

I want images that will look good on a computer and that will also generate nice prints on a home inkjet. Which color space should I use? Also, does shooting in jpg vs RAW enter into the question?

Thanks

[T06]

.... my understanding is that the adobeRGB has more colours or to be more accurate more tonal values than the sRGB. I'd choose the same on my computer that is on my camera, for me thats adobeRGB. If I'm wrong someone will put you right.;)

[AdamW]

Hi Kev--

I have a choice as to which color space to set my camera on. I looking for advice on which to choose...

[mattdm]

sRGB will also generate decent prints on a inkjet. The primary difference is that the Adobe RGB space, while containing the same absolute number of different colors, is "stretched" to cover richer cyan and greens. These colors won't be displayed on a monitor but can show up in prints.

Assuming you're saving 8-bit images, there's the same absolute number of different colors available; they're just arranged over a different area of all possible colors.

If your image doesn't have many of the "extended" colors, you're not gaining anything and in fact losing because there's fewer bits left over to cover the remaining colors.

My advice is to set it for sRGB and not worry about it unless you're primarily taking pictures of landscapes for print.

Also, I highly recommend the book "Mastering Color Digital Photography", by Michael Freeman. It's pretty new, so I had to get it on interlibrary loan, but conversely it'll be in a lot of bookstores right now. It covers this and a lot of other fascinating color related topics specifically applied to digital photography.

[mattdm]

Oh yeah, I also want to add that since your computer monitor can't display Adobe RGB, it makes it hard to do accurate color correction. If you're going to be doing that kind of thing, you literally have to tweak, print, tweak, print -- time consuming and expensive.

[AdamW]

Mattdm--

Thanks-- that clears it up.

Adam

[D Thompson]

If you shoot RAW it doesn't matter as you can choose it when you convert. However, I use sRGB when I do convert. It is my understanding that Adobe RGB is best used if you are using CMYK and going to send it to a printing press. Use sRGB for stuff on your monitor and inkjet printing.

[TNB]

sRGB was conceived as a multipurpose color space standard . . . It is essentially a compromise color space which all digital cameras and inkjet printers and monitors are able to match. sRGB aims to match the color gamut of a typical 2.2 gamma PC monitor . . . It is an ideal color for web design but unsuitable for photography or serious print work. This is mainly because the sRGB space clips the CMYK gamut quite severely. . . .
* * * * *
Adobe RGB (1998) has become establish as the recommended RGB editing space for RGB files that are destined to be converted to CMYK . . . I have adopted Adobe RGB as my preferred RGB working space, since it has a larger color gamut and is particularly suited for RGB to CMYK color conversions.
Adobe Photoshop CS2 for Photographers, p. 488-489, by Martin Evening, Focal Press 2005.

[T06]

..Thom Hogan pretty much says the same too. I just went through reformatting my screen into sRGB, hmmmm, might go back to what I had. If you have to ask, read the whole thread again.;)

[AdamW]

...it's now once again unclear.:eek:

[T06]

.........try one if you like it keep it. If you don't like the first one go to the other. My interpretation is if you are going to be getting photos printed you are better off having adobeRGB1998. If you are only going to be viewing your photos on the pc sRGB is good for go. If you really want something to keep you busy try here.http://www.drycreekphoto.com/Learn/monitor_calibration.htm:eek:

[mattdm]

Try this article too: http://www.outdoorphotographer.com/content/2005/july/dh_color.shtml

T06 -- what monitor do you have? As far as I know, only relatively expensive LED-backlight monitors can actually accurately reproduce this space. More power to you if you have one, but most people don't.

Possibly in a few years this whole issue will become moot and everything will switch to xvYCC....

[T06]

the monitor is a BENQ FP91G+.
Great article, as with a lot of things, most can be challenged with 'rationale'. I wasn't trying to push the adobe but for what I see on my screen I think it works. I've taken pics plenty in sRGB & never had complaints either, well apart from my technique that is.

[mattdm]

the monitor is a BENQ FP91G+.

Yeah, so with that, I don't think you can really display Adobe RGB. In fact, BENQ makes a big deal on their FP91R (http://www.benq-eu.com/products/LCD/?product=675) "professional" model about how it's great because other models can't even properly handle the sRGB gamut.

Until the newer LED-backlit monitors become normal, I'm going to stick to my earlier comment about using sRGB instead of Adobe unless you plan to print/adjust/print/adjust/print, etc.