Re: Profoto
Re: Profoto
- Subject: Re: Profoto
- From: email@hidden (Bruce Fraser)
- Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2001 09:07:02 -0700
At 10:47 AM -0500 11/30/01, Terry Wyse wrote:
on 11/30/01 9:41 AM, Jamie Quaile wrote:
What difference would I get from converting to cmyk from a Profoto rgb space
rather than lets say from a smaller Adobe rgb space. cmyk is to be standard
US SWOP.
I'm curious what device you have that actually can USE ProPhotoRGB but I
digress. And you'd better be thinking 16bit instead of 8bit for this space.
You'd probably not see much improvement if that's what you mean. AdobeRGB is
big enough for CMYK SWOP and going to a bigger space like ProPhoto would
mean you'd have to be more careful with things like rendering intents. You'd
probably almost be forced to use perceptual when going from ProPhoto to CMYK
instead of relative colorimetric. Tough space to edit in also; little moves
turn into big jumps in color.
Adobe RGB actually clips some cyans and oranges that are quite
printable, and that ProPhoto does not. The difference is fairly
subtle but not unnoticable. The downside of course is that ProPhoto
contains many definitions of 'colors' that we can't capture,
reproduce, or see...
I haven't found ProPhoto hard to edit in. I always use it for color
neg, and quite often for other imagery too. You do generally need to
stay away from 0s and 255s, but for a large-gamut space I've found it
to be very well-behaved. It's a lot easier to make small color moves
in ProPhoto than in Lab!
The biggest difference I see is in saturated dark colors, the kind of
things you see in shoe catalogs, for example.
Bruce
--
email@hidden
| References: | |
| | >Re: Profoto (From: Terry Wyse <email@hidden>) |