Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-21-2007, 09:28 AM   #16
Site Supporter
ebooks4pentax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: California, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 444
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I exclusively use DNG "Digital Negative" format and set my color space on the camera to "Adobe RGB" and in PS to "ProPhoto RGB". "ProPhoto" has the widest gamut of all of the color spaces available.

Ben
Ben:

How do you set up your K10D for ProPhotoRGB? Or do you convert the raw file to it in software?

Yvon Bourque

04-21-2007, 12:22 PM   #17
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 46
QuoteOriginally posted by k10dbook Quote
Ben:

How do you set up your K10D for ProPhotoRGB? Or do you convert the raw file to it in software?

Yvon Bourque
RAW files dont have a colourspace. They just have information. Once you put that on a computer and start working on it, you need a way of processing this information.

I personally like the "paint by numbers" analogy. A RAW file is like paint by numbers drawing, with hundreds of different numbers. To make an accurate representation of what is there, you need a really big box of crayons; say, for example, the 256 crayon superpack. This is ProPhotoRGB. It has every single shade you need to complete your artwork (theres a couple blue crayons that look exactly the same - dont worry, your eyes just cant tell the difference).

Now lets say your box of crayons wasnt as big, say, 64 crayons. Thats still ALOT of crayons, and you could probably complete your masterpiece with enough colour accuracy that most people would be hard pressed to tell that its not quite right. You're missing a bunch of green shades, and a couple deep deep reds. This is AdobeRGB.

Some people just want to make colour photocopies of their colour by number art, and since the colour scanner can only read so many colours, they only bother getting the 24 pack of crayons. This is sRGB. No one wants to be the kid with the 24 pack of crayons....

So, colour spaces are just the box of crayons we use to work on our RAW files. In Lightroom and Photoshop, you can use the crayon superpack of ProPhotoRGB to do your work. Just be aware, that if you coloured something with ProPhoto, and try to scan it (ie put it on the internet), it wont look good. You need to convert it first (in photoshop, edit > convert to profile, or in lightroom, just export as sRGB). Just remember to work with the biggest box of crayons until its no longer practical, then convert to something that everyone can appreciate...


And yes, mcleoud151, I do shoot alot of snowboarding. I'm just starting to get into it this year, hopefully next year will be alot more productive (especially with some pro DA* glass!). Its tough to get into, and you have to be an expert shredder yourself to keep up with the pros, but the northwest is the best place in north america to break into the industry...
04-21-2007, 12:40 PM   #18
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Boise, Idaho
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,414
I like the color by numbers analogy. Some day all html browsers will read embedded profiles and display proper colors from the 256 pack. Well, I can dream at least.

One of the things I like about Lightroom is that the ProPhotoRGB space is not only automatic, it is the only option.

There are lots of books and websites out there that explain color management more completely and I recommend that all photographers read up on it. An image is only as good as the weakest link in the chain that produced it so it is important that the entire process be correct.
04-21-2007, 02:21 PM   #19
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
There is a problem with what you started in this thread; let me explain by analogy.

Do you have a sleeping partner? (Question is rhetorical, I don't care who you sleep with--it's just the easiest analogy I could quickly conjure.) A wife, girlfriend, significant other that shares your bed?

For the purpose of this analogy let's say you do and further that the bed is king-sized. Normally you put sheets, blankets and maybe a spread or comforter on that bed--all sized to king-size dimensions.

Now it's a cold night and the power is off so the lights are out and you cannot find any candles. And some trickster has slipped into your bedroom and replaced all the linen, blankets and comforter with similar items sized for a childs twin-bed.

I can guarantee that either you or your sleeping partner is going to have a rough night!


Well you've done something very similar with your color management advice. RAW conversion and color management are super-king-sized topics (In the US that would be a California King Bed-extra wide, extra long!). And telling folks to shoot RAW, with AdobeRGB default supplied to EXIF and then working in ProphotoRGB is very much like putting twin-sized linen and covers on that king sized bed and asking two adults to sleep there on a cold night.

Somebody is going to be 'out in the cold'.







Don't take this wrong; I concede you may actually know a little about these two topics! But this 5 cent verse from the gospel of benjikan doesn't provide enough context to be useful to any of the faithful--as I scan the thread I'm forced to conclude that overall, this thread is replete with error and mis-statement.


Until we get to davemdsn---users should take his advice: find a good book on the subject(s), read that.

04-21-2007, 02:44 PM   #20
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 46
Are you talking to me?

There is no colour space attached to a RAW file until you assign one. When you set your camera to AdobeRGB, that only affects the processing applied to the RAW image in-camera to create a jpeg. Nothing is assigned to the RAW image itself.

Whether your in-camera setting is sRGB or AdobeRGB, it has no bearing whatsoever on your RAW output - only jpeg.

Last edited by option; 04-21-2007 at 03:04 PM. Reason: added some substance to the original question...
04-21-2007, 03:06 PM   #21
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
Original Poster
ACR

QuoteOriginally posted by k10dbook Quote
Ben:

How do you set up your K10D for ProPhotoRGB? Or do you convert the raw file to it in software?

Yvon Bourque
My colorspace in the K10D is Adobe RGB, which is inconsequential, being that I am shooting RAW. There are four options in ACR 3.7 and one of them are ProPhoto RGB which is the default setting. So the image comes in to ACR and is opened directly as a ProPhoto RGB. I then open PS in ProPhoto RGB as well.

Here is an interesting article from "Luminous Landscape" you may wish to read.

Understanding ProPhoto RGB

Last edited by benjikan; 04-21-2007 at 03:13 PM.
04-21-2007, 06:25 PM   #22
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by option Quote
I personally like the "paint by numbers" analogy. A RAW file is like paint by numbers drawing, with hundreds of different numbers. To make an accurate representation of what is there, you need a really big box of crayons; say, for example, the 256 crayon superpack. [...]
This analogy is decent, but doesn't describe color space. What you're describing is bit depth -- that's the number of crayons. Color space is simply the range of differences between each crayon. An 8-bit color depth × 3 color channels provides 16,777,216 "crayons". A 16-bit color depth provides 281,474,976,710,656.

If you are using a "small" color space like sRGB, your crayons are all relatively similar in color. This is great for finely depicting smooth changes in the colors you do have, but because you've used up so many of the crayons on similar colors to provide these tiny distinctions, you're inevitably short on crayons for depicting other colors entirely. Your box may be great with blues and reds, but come up a bit short with certain shades of purple or green.

On the other hand, if you choose to have a whole assortment of widely different colors, you can capture different types of colors pretty well, but may end up with a posterized effect if you don't have enough crayons devoted to very, very particular shades of (for example) blue. 16.7 million sounds like a lot, but if you stretch even that too thin, the results can be noticeable.

So, choosing a color space is all about choosing this compromise.

On the other hand, if you use 16-bit color depth, you get 16.7 million crayons for every crayon in the 8-bit color depth. That gives you plenty of room to use a ridiculously stretched-out color space without worrying about having enough to cover the subtle colors too.

In addition to the wider gamut display devices I mentioned earlier, eventually all devices and standard file types will move to bigger color depths, and we'll not have to worry about this any more.
04-21-2007, 07:25 PM   #23
Veteran Member
jfdavis58's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: 13 S 0357397-3884316
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 876
QuoteOriginally posted by option Quote
Are you talking to me?

There is no colour space attached to a RAW file until you assign one. When you set your camera to AdobeRGB, that only affects the processing applied to the RAW image in-camera to create a jpeg. Nothing is assigned to the RAW image itself.

Whether your in-camera setting is sRGB or AdobeRGB, it has no bearing whatsoever on your RAW output - only jpeg.

No, not specifically talking to you; more like talking right by you. There is a navigator tree displayed at the top of the forum if you view it in hybrid or threaded Display Mode. Here you will find that I'm replying to the OP.

But now that you've inserted yourself, you're wrong. There is a ColorSpace attached to the RAW file--not the colloquial or common sRGB/aRGB you're making such a fuss over, but rather the ColorSpace of the chip itself.

Many, myself included, are under the impression that converting from RAW to RGB requires some knowledge of the modulation response characteristics of the chip--implicitly some form of companding curve. Knowledge of the colorspace per se.

Part and parcel of the time between when a new chip/camera is introduced and when a third party (Like Adobe/ACR) updates their RAW converter is directly related to the licensing and transmission of that curve from the camera manufacturer to the 3rd party (or alternatively, the time it takes to empirically determine the curve from experiments.)


As to other comments/contributions of this thread, I stand by my previous advise--get a book.

04-21-2007, 09:52 PM   #24
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,331
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I would strongly suggest that all of you who have the capacity to shoot in RAW do so. The latitude potential for future requirements are such that you can always go back to the original files and tweak them using the newest software available, which in the future may be capable of extracting even more of the nuances that our software is capable of doing today. JPEG is like analogue tape. The more you open and adjust the more the degradation.

Just a bit of advice that I feel is crucial for all of your future file manipulation.

Ben
I just tend to take perfect photos in the first place - don't require any manipulation ever then!
04-21-2007, 10:07 PM   #25
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 46
Alright, well regardless of whether I have the whole picture completely correct, am I right when I say if you're using RAW, you should be working in 16 bit ProPhotoRGB? And that the colour space you set in the camera has no bearing whatsoever on your RAW output?

And please, books? That is so 20th century...
04-22-2007, 08:02 AM   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Porto - Portugal
Posts: 29
Hi people,

Well...., I confess. In the minimum I'm a bit cunfused with all this.
It seems that there are a lot of ways of doing it well or I'm wrong?

Can someone contribute with some links or pdfs that may help to clarify some ideas?

Many thanks.
Regards,
Palu

p.s. - I love the 20th century books...
04-22-2007, 11:25 AM   #27
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by Palu Guimaraes Quote
Well...., I confess. In the minimum I'm a bit cunfused with all this.
It seems that there are a lot of ways of doing it well
There certainly are lot of ways of doing it wrong, IMHO. Especially since just about all the output devices we are using can only display sRGB. Before starting to mess with all of this, I would enquire whether the place where you print can handle AdobeRGB or whatever else.
04-22-2007, 03:31 PM   #28
PDL
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,142
QuoteOriginally posted by RBellavance Quote
There certainly are lot of ways of doing it wrong, IMHO. Especially since just about all the output devices we are using can only display sRGB. Before starting to mess with all of this, I would enquire whether the place where you print can handle AdobeRGB or whatever else.
On my PC I am running the graphics card using the Adobe1998 color space my printer is also set to print using the Adobe1998 color space. I shoot RAW with the camera set to AdobeRGB - (Both cameras - *ist Ds and K10D) Both computing side devices are using the icc profiles from Adobe. Sorry if your computer can not manage this.

When I print to Costco - (8x12 - 12x18 and 20x30) from my *ist Ds - from RAW I use Lightroom and the printer profiles supplied by Costco - no problem. (Oh and by the way - a full frame shot off my Ds at 20x30 is beautiful - even when you put your nose up to it) I can not wait to get an image at 20x30 off of my K10D - just need to get up off my vertical smile and take something worth printing that size.

PDL

Last edited by PDL; 04-22-2007 at 03:32 PM. Reason: spelling
04-22-2007, 06:04 PM   #29
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by option Quote
Alright, well regardless of whether I have the whole picture completely correct, am I right when I say if you're using RAW, you should be working in 16 bit ProPhotoRGB? And that the colour space you set in the camera has no bearing whatsoever on your RAW output?
Yes to the last bit. But for the rest....

I'm not entirely convinced by ProPhoto RGB. If you're going to be working in any color space you can't display, you're literally working blind. Most monitors (see earlier comment about new better ones) are only in the range of sRGB -- no Adobe RGB, let alone ProPhoto RGB -- which, as I understand, has whole ranges of colors undetectable by the human eye.

If you're aiming for output in print, you can work by printing a proof, tweaking, printing another proof, tweaking more, etc., until you get it right.
Otherwise, my suggestion is to work in sRGB (16-bit if you need it, but for many purposes that's overkill), and if you think you may ever use the image in another way, save the RAW file and come back to it then.

In other words, there is no silver bullet.
04-22-2007, 06:41 PM   #30
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: SE BC and NE Montana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 198
Okay... now my head hurts...

I have been pouring over a myriad of articles on the Internet, three new already slightly dog eared books sitting on my desk, and associated magazines from the library in the last four weeks in anticipation of my first digital camera arriving. Cramming for the arrival of the camera as it were...

Color management and color space are two of the main items in the brave new world I'm about to enter that I'm still somewhat bewildered with. I feel fairly well prepared to sally forth armed with a new K10D, a 24" monitor, and Photoshop CS on the 'puter (my wife's, the graphics guru who has already told me I'm on my own) to deal with the aftermath.

RAW, I understand, but the decisions related to colorspace I don't. I certainly do understand that the professionals and very serious amateurs will want and need something much different than people like me. But beyond that point, confusion reigns.

What works for the unwashed masses out there whose images mostly end up being displayed on the web, decent monitors at home, and the occasional printout at Costco? It seems the answers point in all directions, ranging from stuff like Ken Rockwell (yes, I have come to realize many regard him as being just slightly better than the Anti-Christ) claiming sRGB is the answer, to Luminous Landscape and the article on ProPhoto RGB (thanks for that excellent link). Rockwell typifies the "keep it in the default mode" arguments I have read and sounds quite logical in doing so - of course as they say, on the Internet nobody knows if you're a dog. The Luminous Landscape article and some of you folks here advocate the other side of the coin.

Bottom line: having read all of it, I'm left going "Huh?" And my head hurts...

I suspect I'm more or less typical. I'll have a very competent camera, and I have a pretty good monitor and one piece of pretty good software along with whatever Pentax software my camera arrives with. It's unlikely I'll be printing at home when I want prints, my graphic artist skills are limited beyond doing cartography layout, and I mostly want to practice photography, not graphic artistry. I don't even know if my wife the graphics guru and her masters in fine arts is really knowledgeable about the colorspace issue (I do know she has no interest in the 'puter or talking about it once her workday is done...).

So where is Joe Sixpack (if there is such a thing) at the end of the day? Buy a device to calibrate my monitor? Well that makes great sense and works for me - already in the works.

But beyond that will my hobby profit from and enjoy teaching myself all about color profiles, and all the cool little settings in all my software? Will I even see a difference when most of the viewing of my images will be over the Internet or on computer monitors in homes? Particularly if Joe Sixpack has a less than finely tuned eye for colors in the first place?

I'm confused further because as a GIS Analyst I knock off some pretty darned impressive maps with all kinds of cool graphics on them using an HP1050C plotter. I do it almost every day. They come straight out of ArcMap - a program which is most definitely not focused on high end graphics manipulation. The stuff printed on the photo glossy paper for public presentations and whatnot really catches the eye. All of that is done straight from the default driver for that plotter - if there's settings for different colorspace settings, I haven't even noticed them in the three years I've been running plots out of that machine.

At present, I take some confidence from the fact that I will always have the original RAW files somewhere. Should I get smarter later on in my journey through the digital world, or realize I have made a mistake in my choices and settings regarding color, well, I can always go back to square one with the original files and start all over again, correct? But who wants to start all over again?

So... is there any kind of general concensus on whether Joe Sixpack should stick with sRGB, step one up to Adobe RGB, or go whole hog and flounder around trying to get everything set up properly in ProPhoto RGB?

I suppose if I didn't live out in the sticks there'd be some continuing education class somewhere that I could spend a weekend playing around and getting this all straight in my head.

Thanks in advance for any attempts to make sense out of all this for the Joe Sixpacks out there...

Edited to add: Did mattdm just adress just this in the message he posted while I was writing this?
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, future, photography, software
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K10D long exposure noise reduction when shooting RAW? Robert S Donovan Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 08-19-2013 11:42 AM
Pentax K-r fact sheet, specs, and reviews Adam Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 09-15-2010 03:18 PM
K-x shooting in raw wingman Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 5 06-14-2010 10:55 AM
Are you also shooting raw ONLY? D0ri Photographic Technique 51 06-03-2010 12:01 PM
Pentax DSLRS RAW + JPEG, and all DSLRs for that matter. ebooks4pentax Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 10-01-2008 01:59 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:44 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top