Re: On the use of wide-gamut RGB working spaces
Re: On the use of wide-gamut RGB working spaces
- Subject: Re: On the use of wide-gamut RGB working spaces
- From: Marco Ugolini <email@hidden>
- Date: Wed, 08 Oct 2008 20:35:47 -0700
- Thread-topic: On the use of wide-gamut RGB working spaces
In a message dated 10/8/08 10:01 AM, Mike Strickler wrote:
>>
>
> As someone who has scanned, edited, converted, and archived a fair
> number of images over the years I'll just throw out some random
> observations on this matter.
>
> 1. Ultra-wide spaces like DonRGB, Ektaspace, and ProPhoto RGB are
> justified for archiving when the original contains colors beyond the
> limits of the usual working spaces such as Adobe RGB and sRGB, but
> not justified otherwise.
I would say "not necessary" instead of "not justified". An image can be
stored in ProPhoto RGB even without taking up a very significant portion of
its available gamut. That would not hurt anything. It's advisable to work in
16 bits in that case, though.
> 2. Ultra-wide spaces are harder to do subtle edits in and should only
> be used with 16-bit files.
While I understand that caution in theory, in practice I have not suffered
ill effects from moves that appeared "excessive" following a small edit.
Again, as long as one works in 16 bits.
> 3. Use the smallest color space needed to encompass all the colors in
> the original with a little room to spare--it makes editing easier.
Could you please provide a practical example that proves such an advantage?
I'm open to being persuaded by convincing evidence. Perhaps you are able to
spare an image or two that prove the point, if that is OK.
> 5. There's nothing wrong with sRGB or special about Adobe RGB, but
> customers still associated the latter with "quality" even when
> there's no need for its larger gamut (which is principally in the
> greens.) Nonetheless, I hesitate to convert form the former to the
> latter; it's illogical and gains nothing.
Agreed. Going from a smaller space to a larger one does not *add* anything
to the file. It pushes the existing image elements around within a larger
environment, but it cannot create detail that doesn't already exist. Whereas
an image file that is natively in a larger space possibly possesses
(depending on how much of that space it occupies) saturated detail that
*cannot* exist in a smaller color space.
> 6. The perceived need for ultra-wide color spaces is sometimes
> (though not always) driven by poor judgment that demands artificial,
> oversaturated color.
Sometimes -- but often it's just because the user intends to preserve all
the colors that were produced, say, in a rendered Raw file or in a
high-quality scan.
Marco Ugolini
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Colorsync-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden