sRGB vs. Adobe RGB: Weigh In With Your Opinion

[Jason Dunn]

I really appreciated everyone's input on my <a href="http://www.digitalhomethoughts.com/news/show/32097/calling-all-digital-photographers-what-s-your-opinion-of-uv-lens-filters.html" target="_blank">question about UV filters</a>, so I thought I'd try again with something that's been perplexing me over the past week: the question of whether to shoot in sRGB of Adobe RGB. I've been shooting in sRGB since starting with my first DSLR (I don't even recall if my first digital Canon Rebel had an option for anything else). When I got my Nikon D200, I looked into Adobe RGB, but after <a href="http://www.smugmug.com/help/srgb-versus-adobe-rgb-1998" target="_blank">reading this Smugmug page</a>, I quickly dismissed it. Lately though, after getting my Nikon D300, I've started to ponder it more - especially after reading an article about getting great prints at home where the author specifically called out the need to use Adobe RGB mode on your camera because of the great colour gamut. When you shoot in RAW you can decide what format to use for the export of the JPEG, sRGB or Adobe RGB (at least in Adobe Lightroom you can).<br /><br />I did a quick test, and I was surprised how obvious the difference was - the Adobe RGB image was clearly more true to life than the sRGB image. I won't tell you which is which - you'll have to hover over each of the images to see which one is sRGB and which one is Adobe RGB. [photos after the break]<br /><div style="page-break-after: always;"><span style="display: none;">&nbsp;</span></div><br /><img border="1" src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/500/dht/auto/1201132466.usr1.jpg" alt="Adobe RGB" /><br /><br /><img border="1" src="http://images.thoughtsmedia.com/resizer/thumbs/size/500/dht/auto/1201132488.usr1.jpg" alt="sRGB" /><br /><br />Did you figure out which was which before hovering over each one? The Adobe RGB image definitely is a better match to the actual yellow of the desk calendar. The sRGB image is darker and slightly over-saturated looking. The question becomes though, even if I have more accurate images, if upload Adobe RGB images to Smumug they get converted to sRGB anyway...so the extra gamut would only benefit me if I print them out at home on my Epson R1800. As you can probably tell, I'm leaning toward sticking with sRGB - though this exploration does make me wish that the industry, collectively, would align on a new standard with a higher gamut. Maybe that's&nbsp; <a href="http://www.naturephotographers.net/articles1203/mh1203-1.html" target="_blank">ProPhoto RGB</a>?

[yslee]

You just opened a whole can of worms, you know.

My first advice is to shoot RAW. That way when you're importing the file in you can decide what colourspace it should be in when you're doing the post processing.

My second advice is to ask how calibrated your entire workflow is. If something isn't calibrated it'll just break the whole chain. The follow up question is to ask if everything is set to use the same colourspace. If not, when converting to the lower gamut colourspace for the final output, is the extra hassle worth it? If you're using your printer try to get a good profile for your papers and play around with Photoshops print settings. Make sure the printer and Photoshop are playing nice with one another!

The final piece of advice I have is to not get too caught up with all of this. This kind of detail is usually for the last 10% to perfection. You can get very good photos even when shooting in sRGB... and as far as I know, you're still learning a lot. Try not to get overloaded with information. Confused brains tend to pick up bad habits. :P

Incidentally, my RAWs start at ProPhoto. However it does take some skill and restraint in processing them; there's a tendency to go overboard if you're not careful and end up with terrible results when you convert over to a smaller gamut.

[SassKwatch]

IMO, this is one of those technical details photographers ought not spend much time fretting over. And which of the 2 one chooses to use largely depends on how your predominant means of sharing photos will be.

If your primary means of sharing is over the web, and you only occasionally print images, then sRGB is probably the way to go. By contrast, if you're more print oriented, then Adobe RGB is probably the best choice.

The one thing I would find a bit odd is shooting RAW format in sRGB. In theory, it seems anyone shooting RAW has some intentions towards preserving as much image data as possible, so why shoot in a narrower color gamut?

Even odder to me is those who spend significant money on high end DSLR's with 10-12mp and up capabillities, but never print anything and only share their images via the web or email. If that's your venue (and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), why bother with anything other than a 5-6mp P&S device....it will provide all the quality you need.

[yslee]

The one thing I would find a bit odd is shooting RAW format in sRGB. In theory, it seems anyone shooting RAW has some intentions towards preserving as much image data as possible, so why shoot in a narrower color gamut?

When you shoot in RAW, the colour mode settings don't do a thing. Colourspace tagging and interpretation will come in only when you specify the colourspace during RAW import.

Even odder to me is those who spend significant money on high end DSLR's with 10-12mp and up capabillities, but never print anything and only share their images via the web or email. If that's your venue (and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), why bother with anything other than a 5-6mp P&S device....it will provide all the quality you need.

Because... they can? :P Unfortunately there are many people out there with more money than brains.

And good luck finding 5-6mp devices. The world is going mad!

[Jason Dunn]

My second advice is to ask how calibrated your entire workflow is. If something isn't calibrated it'll just break the whole chain.

I've calibrated the Dell monitor on my computer where I edit RAW images, but that's about it - I use that same machine to print to the Epson R1800, use the right Epson paper profiles, etc. But I also don't use Photoshop CS3, so I don't have the soft-proofing that program has...I tend to print from Photoshop Elements or ADCSee Pro.

The final piece of advice I have is to not get too caught up with all of this. This kind of detail is usually for the last 10% to perfection. You can get very good photos even when shooting in sRGB...

Yeah, I posted mostly because I was curious what the photographers that read this site would say about it. :)

[rtrueman]

As yslee mentions, when you shoot raw, it doesn't matter what colorspace you use in camera as this can be assigned on import. My workflow centers around Nikon Capture NX (another can of worms here). With it, I process in AdobeRBG and re-save the NEF. This allows me to keep my processing in the file with the raw data. I can also tag the steps to create a "snapshot" of a final version. For instance, I process the NEF adding the last step as "Convert to Profile -> sRGB" I then save a snapshot as "high-res". I then add a Resize step to size for 800 pixels on the longest edge and 72 dpi. I save a snapshot as "Upload". This image is used in my online galleries. If I print an image, I deselect the Convert to Profile step and Resize step and take a snapshot as "For Print". At any time I can select the snapshot within Capture NX and "Save As" a JPG, TIF, etc.

Ysless, what are your thoughts on changing the workflow to ProPhoto? What applications (besides the higher-end photo apps) understand the colorspace? I assume viewing a ProPhoto image in a browser will be different than showing it in Photoshop (much like AdobeRGB).

Ok, full disclosure!!! As I was typing this reply, I thought about my workflow. I've been creating sRGB high-res JPGs and using them for printing! I use QImage to print and convert to the printer profile. I guess I'm screwing up here as I'm starting with an sRGB image! Hmmm.

Rob

[Jason Dunn]

If your primary means of sharing is over the web, and you only occasionally print images, then sRGB is probably the way to go. By contrast, if you're more print oriented, then Adobe RGB is probably the best choice.

That's a good way of looking at it, and since I share 99% of my images over the Web (I print some of them, but not that many), sRGB is where I shall stay.

The one thing I would find a bit odd is shooting RAW format in sRGB.

I explained this one poorly: when I'm shooting in RAW + JPEG, the choice of sRGB or Adobe RGB is applied only to the JPEG. When I export my RAW to JPEG, Lightroom gives me the choice of sRGB, Adobe RGB, or ProPhoto.

Even odder to me is those who spend significant money on high end DSLR's with 10-12mp and up capabillities, but never print anything and only share their images via the web or email. If that's your venue (and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), why bother with anything other than a 5-6mp P&S device....it will provide all the quality you need.

I have to respectfully disagree 100% with you. The sensor and lens, even on an expensive P&S camera (like the Canon SD870, pale in comparison with even an entry-level DSLR. I've been shooting with DSLRs for about five years now, and I'd never, ever say that the images any of them take are in the same league as any P&S. There are half a dozen immediately apparent things that jump out at me when I look at any image taken with my Canon SD870 vs. my D200.

What camera(s) do you shoot with? I'm trying to figure out why you'd say something like this...unless by "quality" you strictly mean resolution and you're not talking about image quality, noise, sharpness, colour, or any of the other things that make a good photo a good photo. :D

[yslee]

Prophoto (or any extended gamut colourspace) really is meant for work. So yes, it'll work like Adobe RGB. Just be careful when working in it. The first time I tried it I went a little overboard and ended up with really horrible prints. Soft-proofing is your friend, as is not overzealous use of curves and colour tweaks...

[rtrueman]

I'll have to look further in to ProPhoto. I'm confused about how processing an image can produce bad results depending on the colorspace. Interesting. I think it's something you have to play with to fully understand. I'll assume it has to do with the conversion of the larger colorspace to the smaller.

Another question... When converting an image to sRGB (or any "smaller" colorspace) and saving that image as a JPG, are the out of gamut colors clipped? If I take this same sRGB JPG and assign or convert to a larger colorspace, do I regain the color information? My assumption is I'm not getting the colors information back, but I'm not sure if the assignment/conversion of a colorspace changes data or simply the interpretation of data.

Rob