Re: ProPhoto RGB or Adobe RGB 1998 or ...
Re: ProPhoto RGB or Adobe RGB 1998 or ...
- Subject: Re: ProPhoto RGB or Adobe RGB 1998 or ...
- From: email@hidden
- Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2004 09:19:04 EST
<<What was your rationale for going with ProPhoto RGB? Was the decision
based primarily on Lab gamut efficiency?
Any issues in later converting from 16 bit, gamma 1.8 (ProPhoto RGB) to
8 bit, gamma 2.2 (e.g., AdobeRGB or another output profile)?>>
Rich,
My rationale was that AdobeRGB et al were too small to encompass edited
camera files and the Epson gamut. This may seem strange working from digital camera
images that were originally captured in AdobeRGB. But to reproduce the
colorfulness of a scene captured at high luminance (ie a bright hazeless day), the
chroma needs to be increased to recreate a viewers impression of the original
scene since the print will be viewed at lower luminance. Actually, this is
very easy to accomplish in PS if you know the camera exposure and ISO associated
with an image. However, such edits may move the image beyond the gamut of
AdobeRGB. Therefore, I immediately convert to 16bit ProPhotoRGB with soft
proofing and the gamut warning on. Then edit making sure the image stays within the
printer gamut. No problem converting to the printer profile. 16bit ProPhotoRGB
is not very efficient, but it works and works very well. Converting to a
smaller gamut such as sRGB or AdobeRGB would cause a significant gamut map. So if
you know you must ultimately output to a smaller space, be careful.
Eric Walowit
Tahoe
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives:
http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.