Re: Maximum color gamut for storage needs!
Re: Maximum color gamut for storage needs!
- Subject: Re: Maximum color gamut for storage needs!
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2001 11:14:34 EDT
In a message dated 7/11/01 5:38:09 AM, email@hidden writes:
>
I want to scan over 500.000 color and B/w images from the 19th and
>
20th century; I represent a leading photo archive. My color expert
>
suggested to save them in sRGB format since I currently do most of my
>
business over the web and with many pre press and graphic people.
Many users would not notice the difference, but it would be a shame, if you
have any truely brilliant images, to lose that info permanently...
>
>
However I know that sRGB clip off some color gamut; probably it will
>
be wise to same my 2000x3000 pixel files as CIELAB, or Adobe RGB and
>
than batch processing the tumbnails and medium resolution as
>
sRGB..... What do you think???
AdobeRGB should be large enough for most reasonable uses without going
overboard... the other issue is that using a larger space than AdobeRGB
really requires using highbit format, or you will end up getting coarser
gradiants and less information where it counts most.
>
>
Also, for this consideration, which color space do you believe in
>
considered most appropriate for quality and max amount of color info?
>
Adobe RGB, Apple RGB, etc, etc.....
AppleRGB is not really a serious contender these days, and AdobeRGB has the
virtue of sharing a gamma and whitepoint with sRGB for easy repurposing. So
your remaining decision is whether to to archive highbit targeted scans and
downsample to 8 bits per channel when you do your sRGB conversion, or whether
to target in the scanner software, and downsample to only 8 bits per channel
before saving, which is more convenient and smaller, but less flexible as an
archival copy.
Its a balancing act that requires understanding all the factors and
tradeoffs...
C. David Tobie
Design Cooperative
email@hidden