RE: color gamut -- er, working space

From: Eric Neilsen ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/21/04-03:26:28 PM Z
Message-id: <000001c46f69$63797550$51a0fea9@NEWDELL>

OK Judy, Now it's my turn.


Yes, as Jack said the RAW is more for the photo junkie. Unless you desire
to really get into as Jack says, I'd just use the Color spaces readily at
hand. Now as for what space to work in, that for me, depends on intent. If
I am to print it myself with an Ink jet on a 7600 or 7000 with color inks
and Image Print I work to Color match RGB. If I am going to out put to a
digital RA4 print ( send to color lab on disk) I ask them what color space
they are working in, many are sRGB, some Adobe 1998. If I am making movies
from scans or quick jpegs, I'll work with them in sRGB and convert later to
NTCS color.


I'd set my PS to convert to my normal intent if I were you, while
maintaining an unaltered copy of the file somewhere. I you might consider
setting up a camera import work flow and name it such in the preferences. If
you set your PS color setting to "ask when opening" you'll have the option
to convert or not (sRGB to Adobe 1998 for instance).


If you think of color spaces as big balloons and the information as air this
might help. Some balloons can handle quite a bit before they explode while
others have a small tolerance for more information. Perhaps we should and a
membrane to our balloons that allow the extra information to slip out
instead of pop.



Try Color Setting, Export, or Download in the manual. I don't have one so
these are all guesses. Also look into JPEGS and see if there is any
discussion of file format


Eric Neilsen Photography

4101 Commerce Street

Suite 9

Dallas, TX 75226


-----Original Message-----
From: Jack Fulton []
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2004 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: color gamut -- er, working space


On Jul 20, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Judy Seigel wrote:

Thanks so much to Jack, Mark & Eric for the info. It's a huge relief to
learn that the problem is probably fixable, and I am again in awe of list
knowledge. I'll try to do exactly what Jack says (when I can figure it
out.... Sigh....very humbling).

Mark is right about the thing being "space", not gamut. The message said:

The document... has an embedded color profile that does not match the
current RGB working space. The current RGB color management policy is to
discard profiles that do not match the working space.

Embedded: sRGBIEC61966-2.1 [if I have read my handwriting correctly]

Working: Adobe RGB (1998)


Should I take that to mean the camera color is set to 1966????
Nope . . . there have been 'standards' put forth by different groups at
various times. One of these 'standards' is sRGB which was designed primarily
as a color space for Windows users. If the scanner, camera, printer etc. all
fall in this sRGB space one can achieve, as Garrison Keiler might say,
"pretty good color most of the time." It is kind of a generic way to obtain
and maintain color accuracy and rendering through the cycle of image
creation and final output. you'll be about 80% accurate.

For the serious person involved with Color Management it is not enough.
However, there is a controversy raging over sRGB. Apple says sRGB space and
a 1.8 gamma is the way virtually all the world's computers and instruments
see color. This complies with the Windows idea but the gamma for Windows is
2.2 therefore making an Apple file translated to a Windows environment look
a bit darker.

If one works w/the Macintosh computer you'll need to download specific sRGB
profiles for the camera, scanner, printer etc.

Again, for the person fully interested in WYSIWYG you'll need to have:
1. a good quality and 'fresh' (under 3 years old) monitor w/adjustable RGB
2. monitor calibration soft and hardware to create ICC profiles
3. a) a good RIP such as ImagePrint
b) software and a spectrophotometer to create your own profiles
c) or, well made profiles such as those created by Bill Atkinson for the
Epson UC ink set.

Basically, rather than working with sRBG you'll be in color space such as
Adobe RGB 1968 or ColorMatch or Ektaspace (by Joe Holmes) etc. and you'll be
concerned with ICC profiles.
ICC stands for International Color Consortium, founded in the early 1930's
to establish an agreed upon standardization of color profiles across
platforms. It allows one to move from one platform and in one color space to
another space and platform via 'translation' of these profiles.

The normal person simply does not need this complication in their life.

Mark, I understand you to say that I could change the camera color to the
1998 RGB, so that when you say "read the manual," you mean read the camera
manual... Neither "color" nor "profile" are in the index. What should I look

Eric, I'm not using "raw" -- would I still want the raw plug-in?
If you do not use RAW files you do not require the Adobe plug-in. RAW files
greatly increase storage problems but one does obtain the pure form of the
digital image as rendered by the camera's chip. Much manipulation of
density, saturation, tint, color temperature, smoothing of colors, size of
image and bits can be set when opening a RAW file.
Frankly, the normal person . . including most of us . . cannot see much
difference by using the JPEG files a digital camera can produce.
RAW is for an individual fully into color management more-so than a mere
aficionado do even dilettante.

And I am using Mac OS 9.2. (Even saying the word "Ten" in G-4's space causes
all systems to crash).
A G4 can nicely run Panther 10.3.4 if, when installing, one does not include
all the various languages and printer drivers, particularly the GIMP/Cups
driver. But, there is definitely a learning curve that's a pain in the
Received on Wed Jul 21 15:27:18 2004

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/13/04-09:01:11 AM Z CST