Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: ProPhoto Question  (Read 22076 times)
duranash
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« on: October 17, 2007, 06:31:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Following Ian Lyons guidance, I have set up my Color Settings for Photoshop CS3 to include ProPhoto RGB as the RGB Working Space.  I previously used Adobe RGB in Photoshop 7.  I notice a pretty dramatic difference in terms of the saturation/color that I see on my monitor when I open an image under ProPhoto, compared to the Adobe RGB space.  Is that expected?  I realize the ProPhoto space is wider gamut, but I guess I expected any diffference I might see on my monitor (or a print for that matter) to be pretty subtle.  Have I done something wrong, or should I see a much more saturated image?
Logged
Wayne Fox
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2826



WWW
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2007, 08:01:24 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Following Ian Lyons guidance, I have set up my Color Settings for Photoshop CS3 to include ProPhoto RGB as the RGB Working Space.  I previously used Adobe RGB in Photoshop 7.  I notice a pretty dramatic difference in terms of the saturation/color that I see on my monitor when I open an image under ProPhoto, compared to the Adobe RGB space.  Is that expected?  I realize the ProPhoto space is wider gamut, but I guess I expected any diffference I might see on my monitor (or a print for that matter) to be pretty subtle.  Have I done something wrong, or should I see a much more saturated image?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146758\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Is this when you open an image that was previously opened and saved in Photoshop in the AdobeRGB space, or is it when you first process a RAW file?

How is Photoshop set up to handle missing or mismatched profiles when opening a file?  It sounds like this is where you might be having a problem.  I don't believe you will see much of a visual difference in an image on your monitor, so I would suspect a profile mismatch or error somewhere.
Logged

MikeMike
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


WWW
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2007, 08:11:41 PM »
ReplyReply

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorial...photo-rgb.shtml
Logged
duranash
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2007, 08:34:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Is this when you open an image that was previously opened and saved in Photoshop in the Adobe RGB space, or is it when you first process a RAW file?

I am still shooting film and my images are scanned as TIFFS.  I see the increased saturation when first opening in Photoshop with the working space set for ProPhoto.

I have Photoshop set to "Ask When Opening" for both mismatched or missing profiles.  I then select the assign working profile checkbox (ProPhoto is listed as the working space).  I have used this methodology with Adobe RGB in Photoshop 7 for a long time.  I am using an old but quite servicable CRT monitor.
« Last Edit: October 17, 2007, 08:36:28 PM by duranash » Logged
Richard Marcellus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2007, 09:04:38 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote


I have Photoshop set to "Ask When Opening" for both mismatched or missing profiles.  I then select the assign working profile checkbox (ProPhoto is listed as the working space). [a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146786\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This may be your mistake. You shouldn't be assigning ProPhoto to a file that is actually AdobeRGB, but rather converting to it.

When I open a file in CS3 with a profile mismatch, Assign is not one of my options though. I can either (1) Use the embedded profile, (2) Convert to my working space, or (3) Discard the embedded profile and not colour manage.

You should be picking the 2nd option.


Richard
Logged
duranash
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2007, 10:15:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Richard Marcellus,Oct 18 2007, 02:04 AM
[This may be your mistake. You shouldn't be assigning ProPhoto to a file that is actually AdobeRGB, but rather converting to it.]

When I open my scanned image, the "Missing Profile" box comes up indicating the image file does not have an embedded RGB Profile.  Options are to: Leave as is (don't color manage); Assign Working RGB: ProPhoto RGB; or, Assign Profile [selected from the drop down menu].  I selected Assign RGB: ProPhoto.

[When I open a file in CS3 with a profile mismatch, Assign is not one of my options though. I can either (1) Use the embedded profile, (2) Convert to my working space, or (3) Discard the embedded profile and not colour manage.]

In this case, I didn't have a "mismatch", but rather a "Missing" profile.  Maybe I should be saving the scan to Adobe RGB, then converting to ProPhoto.  I usually don't add a profile in the scanning software - I'll give that a try.
Logged
Richard Marcellus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2007, 10:41:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In this case, I didn't have a "mismatch", but rather a "Missing" profile.  Maybe I should be saving the scan to Adobe RGB, then converting to ProPhoto.  I usually don't add a profile in the scanning software - I'll give that a try.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146802\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

When you scan the scanner should be scanning into a defined RGB space. This should be selectable with your software. I don't understand why no profile is embedded. Check your scanner settings to make sure colour management is set up properly.

If you want to work in ProPhotoRGB in Photoshop, don't scan into AdobeRGB. Taking a "clipped" image then putting it into a bigger colour space won't be as useful as scanning into as wide a gamut space as you can first. If you don't have ProPhoto as an option in your scanner software try something like WideGamutRGB.

I am not a colour expert, but I recall that for scanning film, some pros prefer specialized spaces like Ektaspace or ChromeSpace 100 (both by Joseph Holmes, I think). Perhaps a real color expert like Andrew Rodney will offer some advice on this.

The way I see it is that there are more advantages to being in a bigger space than a smaller one, as long as you are using 16 bit/channel, and this is important. ProPhoto can store any color that we can capture or see but because it is so big you don't want to break each channel into 8 bits of resolution, you need 15/16 bits.

Richard
Logged
bjanes
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2783



« Reply #7 on: October 17, 2007, 11:34:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Following Ian Lyons guidance, I have set up my Color Settings for Photoshop CS3 to include ProPhoto RGB as the RGB Working Space.  I previously used Adobe RGB in Photoshop 7.  I notice a pretty dramatic difference in terms of the saturation/color that I see on my monitor when I open an image under ProPhoto, compared to the Adobe RGB space.  Is that expected?  I realize the ProPhoto space is wider gamut, but I guess I expected any diffference I might see on my monitor (or a print for that matter) to be pretty subtle.  Have I done something wrong, or should I see a much more saturated image?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=146758\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

It may seem counterintuitive, but the purpose of color management is for the image to look the same on any screen or output device, provided that there are no gamut limitations of the the devices. Since no (or very few) monitors can exceed the gamut of aRGB, ProPhoto should look the same on the monitor as aRGB. ProPhoto can hold more saturated color than aRGB, but the monitor would not be able to display it.

On the other hand, many of the better ink jet photo printers can easily exceed the gamut of aRGB, and you would see a difference there.

Bill
Logged
Gregory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


WWW
« Reply #8 on: October 18, 2007, 12:59:25 AM »
ReplyReply

when you scan, don't scan into Adobe1998. you'll be losing information. either scan to a RAW format or ProPhoto or one of the ones mentioned in the previous message. as others have stated, once you've clipped the colour gamut, you can't get it back again.
Logged

Gregory's Blog: An Aussie in HK
Equipment: Canon EOS 1D Mark III, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-300 DO
duranash
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #9 on: October 18, 2007, 05:30:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Thanks for the advice and suggestions.  For some reason I had unchecked the profile box in my scanning software.  I usually have this set for adobe RGB, but will play around with some of the other options.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2007, 05:30:34 PM by duranash » Logged
Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #10 on: October 20, 2007, 09:20:14 AM »
ReplyReply

Once you've converted to a smaller color space, there's limited benefit to going back to a larger one. If your scanner software allows, select ProPhoto as your output space there.
Logged

duranash
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #11 on: October 20, 2007, 04:51:52 PM »
ReplyReply

I'm using an old Sprintscan 4000 and it does not list ProPhoto as an output space/profile.  As Richard suggested, there is an option for the WideGamut color space - along with several that I don't recognize.  In addition to Adobe RGB 1998, sRGB and WideGamut RGB, the scanner software allows for CIE RGB, Colormatch RGB, and SMPE-C.  I've assumed that WideGamut would be my best option, then convert to ProPhoto?
Logged
Richard Marcellus
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 64


« Reply #12 on: October 20, 2007, 06:22:57 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm using an old Sprintscan 4000 and it does not list ProPhoto as an output space/profile.  As Richard suggested, there is an option for the WideGamut color space - along with several that I don't recognize.  In addition to Adobe RGB 1998, sRGB and WideGamut RGB, the scanner software allows for CIE RGB, Colormatch RGB, and SMPE-C.  I've assumed that WideGamut would be my best option, then convert to ProPhoto?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=147497\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yes, WideGamut RGB is your best option prior to moving to ProPhotoRGB. It is not quite as big as ProPhoto, but it is bigger than your other options.

Richard
Logged
David Good
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


« Reply #13 on: October 21, 2007, 12:13:27 AM »
ReplyReply

Converting from WideGamut up to ProPhoto is still the wrong approach. There is usually an option to turn off color management and send the unaltered scanner rgb to Photoshop where you can assign your preferred editing space. If that is not an option either settle for one of the choices offered and stay with it, or try an alternate scanning software that is more color managed such as VueScan.
Logged

Jonathan Wienke
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5759



WWW
« Reply #14 on: October 21, 2007, 01:30:36 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Converting from WideGamut up to ProPhoto is still the wrong approach.

It's better than doing no color management and trying to assign a profile to RGB mystery meat. That's guaranteed to deliver bad color results unless you have a custom profile for your scanner & film combination.
Logged

David Good
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


« Reply #15 on: October 22, 2007, 11:17:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Hmm, for negative film I prefer to turn off all color management and auto anything and import into Photoshop where I can assign a working space. I don't consider this mystery meat as long as no other conversions have gone on under the hood. On the other hand, the op's software is likely dated and could be bringing his display profile into the equation, clipping the image data to the smaller display gamut. This would explain the over-saturation when converting to ProPhoto, and would be mystery meat not "raw" scanner data.

We could go on but my feeling is the hardware works well, it's just in need of a software upgrade.

Cheers...
Logged

duranash
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 84


« Reply #16 on: October 23, 2007, 11:14:49 AM »
ReplyReply

Thanks Gentlemen for the suggestions and insights.

David - what you suggested is what I was doing initially - no color management and assigning ProPhoto in Photoshop.  That's when I got the over saturation look on my monitor.  I'm sure you're right - the scanner software is pretty ancient.

Maybe the solution to all of this is to break down and buy that Canon 5D
« Last Edit: October 23, 2007, 11:15:19 AM by duranash » Logged
Gregory
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 191


WWW
« Reply #17 on: October 23, 2007, 12:16:25 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Maybe the solution to all of this is to break down and buy that Canon 5D :rolleyes:
or buy SilverFast 6.5 to use in the meantime. as far as scanning goes, it's probably the best in its class. with multi-exposure, multi-sampling and full ColorSync support, we've been getting excellent scans from our personal negative library.

regards,
Gregory
Logged

Gregory's Blog: An Aussie in HK
Equipment: Canon EOS 1D Mark III, 17-40L, 24-105L, 70-300 DO
jbrembat
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 177


« Reply #18 on: October 23, 2007, 12:51:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Hmm, for negative film I prefer to turn off all color management and auto anything and import into Photoshop where I can assign a working space.

This is not correct, RGB values delivered by the scanner cannot be in Prophoto color space or in any other synthetic color space.

If you have a profile, use it. Otherwise the only way is to fix an output color space.


Jacopo
Logged
David Good
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 145


« Reply #19 on: October 26, 2007, 07:55:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
This is not correct, RGB values delivered by the scanner cannot be in Prophoto color space or in any other synthetic color space.

If you have a profile, use it. Otherwise the only way is to fix an output color space.
Jacopo
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=148156\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


I don't think so, I was suggesting that duranash attempt to import the original scanner RGB data so that, in the absence of a profile, a working space can be assigned. In this case it sounds like the software is clipping the data to the gamut of the display and sending the data as untagged, adding to the confusion.

I use custom profiles (HCT) for slide, but that's not a option for everyone, some canned profiles are quite good. Negative film is more difficult to profile for a variety of reasons. Editing in an output space is probably common in pre-press, but limits a photographer's output choices.
Logged

Pages: [1] 2 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad