sRGB vs. aRGB

[Jared Farrer]

Just wanted to stir up some potential debate on whats preferred for some. And what works for others?

Kinda of an in-depth discussion, but may yeild some insight in to severe weather photography. And cinemaphotography now. With all the 5d mark II footage ive been seeing lately. Not to mention what others are using.

 

[James Langford]

Adobe RBG offers a wider gamut of colors, but most printing outfits don't support it. If you aren't going to print in ARGB, there is no reason to even use it. Just stick with SRGB. If your printer supports it, and you have all of your color profile settings configured properly, using a wider gamut may yield better results. Many pros actually recommend Pro Photo RGB over ARGB as having an even slightly wider gamut.

I use SRGB if my work is bound for the web, as it is the standard for online viewing. When I print locally, I stick with the wider gamut of Pro Photo since my printing shop supports it.

Edit: I'm not sure that color profiles even come into play when shooting video on a 5d mk2 or others. I have a 5d mk2, and have processed a fair amount of videos, and I have never seen an option for color profiles in either shooting or editting.

James

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

Basically, what James said. The caveat is that if you own a really high-end wide-format professional inkjet system and you plan to print all your own gilcees, then aRGB works better as those printers can handle the expanded gamut. Another caveat is that if your images are going to be published in magazines or books, aRGB is better as it converts down to CMYK more gracefully than sRGB. As such, print publishers will prefer an aRGB over sRGB if they can get it.

 

[Darren Addy]

gilcees

**Looks for dictionary**.

EDIT: Not finding in the dictionary.

Most lucid explanation I've seen:



(Actually mentions "post processing SKIES")

 

[James Langford]

giclees are, I believe, a print that appears very close to a painting. They are printing on canvas, and can sometimes even have texture like a painting. I've seen some that I really could not tell apart from a painting. They are also usually wrapped around a frame, like a painting.

 

[Ryan McGinnis]

**Looks for dictionary**.

EDIT: Not finding in the dictionary.

Most lucid explanation I've seen:



(Actually mentions "post processing SKIES")

Doh, I got all dyslexic with the spelling!

https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Giclée

 

[Jared Farrer]

Really expected more chime in than this. Might be over most peoples heads maybe not. So Ryan you shoot aRGB.

And shooting video does imploy these functions. Just because its not in your functions menu doesnt mean its not employed. Just like color styles. Which LOL, most people dont realize it translates to the video recorded as well. And they wonder why the video is so flat. I bet they blam the camera. No, well not saying this is true. But maybe for most people. I guess a degree depends on what most do in post?! Which for most, probable isnt much. I on the otherhand do alot in post most of the time. Depends on the situation. I like to leave something available to edit. Well lets just say most people I know shoot strictly jpeg. Even with DSLRs. Whats the point of owning one then in my opinoin. The whole point is in the raw files. Being able to manipulate them. I guess the same will be true for the budding HDdslr market. Most dont even care to run there video through any sort of post process. In that case I can understand!! But you are losing a big part of what you pay for!

Right?

 

[Wes Carter]

I'm really not sure exactly what you are wanting to discuss, but I shoot sRGB. Even though it does not have the gamut that the Adobe colorspace does, it works for everything I do even doing work for the newspaper or if I get stringer work.

But I don't think you are 'cheating yourself' if you don't shoot RAW. It's great if you are going to do a lot of post-production work but with today's cameras you can usually nail the exposure and everything if you just get to know your camera and how to compensate for tricky situations. You can decide when you shoot to expose for the highlights, the shadows, or the midtones or bracket the shots. I'm not knocking RAW, I use it a lot. But I just don't feel like you are losing anything just because you are not using it. I think you are cheating yourself if you don't learn your camera inside and out. There would be nothing worse than to be the only one on the storm of the century and get some great photos only to find out everything is a blur because you were trying to handhold too long of an exposure because you didn't know how the shutter speed/aperture/ISO settings work on your camera and just shot a program mode.

 

[John Wetter]

I shoot RAW, sRGB. Have never had an issue moving a picture because I'm using the sRGB color space. I've looked at aRGB, but haven't seen it as a big enough advantage to justify making the switch and changing all of my workflows.