Still working on peonies

[xpatUSA]

Ted said: For posting flowers here, perhaps Dan should edit in the sRGB working space, not ProPhoto ...

That wasn't my point. My question was whether it matters when in the process one converts, that is, would the product have been substantially better if I had converted at the beginning and then applied similar edits? I suppose I could check this some day.

You said before: "I haven't tested doing the identical edits after conversion, as you're suggesting, rather than before."

I did not suggest identical edits.

I can not predict that doing the "identical edits" would result in a "substantially better" image because that is a subjective call. Even more so with "similar edits".

I don't worry too much about getting online displays exactly right. After all, they will appear on all sorts of monitors, calibrated and not calibrated, using browsers with different color management. Even if I get it so that it looks dandy on my NEC, it doesn't look all that good on the uncalibrated Dell sitting next to it. So I am willing to be a little loose when it comes to online posting. When I really fuss is when I print.

It appears that you're not bothered by bottomed channels in your posted images, so I'll just back off and withdraw my comment in post #5, Dan.

[DanK]

My question was a technical one, not a response to your suggestion. That is, how much difference does it make where in the process one makes the conversion?

I'm not indifferent to the quality of my images online. However, I take it as a given that they often won't look on other's screens as they do on mine anyway, so I am not going to devote as much time as I do to prints. And since online displays aren't my more serious concern, I'm reluctant to take the time to have two separate editing processes. In this particular case--there have been others--an end-of-process conversion to sRGB created a problem. Usually it doesn't, in my experience.

You said before: "I haven't tested doing the identical edits after conversion, as you're suggesting, rather than before."

I did not suggest identical edits.

I can not predict that doing the "identical edits" would result in a "substantially better" image because that is a subjective call. Even more so with "similar edits".



It appears that you're not bothered by bottomed channels in your posted images, so I'll just back off and withdraw my comment in post #5, Dan.

[Manfred M]

My question was a technical one, not a response to your suggestion. That is, how much difference does it make where in the process one makes the conversion?

I'm not indifferent to the quality of my images online. However, I take it as a given that they often won't look on other's screens as they do on mine anyway, so I am not going to devote as much time as I do to prints. And since online displays aren't my more serious concern, I'm reluctant to take the time to have two separate editing processes. In this particular case--there have been others--an end-of-process conversion to sRGB created a problem. Usually it doesn't, in my experience.

Dan the technical answer, especially for someone who prints, is to do you editing in a wide gamut colour space; generally that means either AdobeRGB or ProPhoto RGB. I understand that some are working in the P3 colour space, but frankly if I recall correctly it is not quite as wide as AdobeRGB and the some of the yellows it reproduces are outside the gamut of inkjet printers. Printers, especially on glossier papers like the barytas will have a gamut that exceeds the Adobe RGB colour space, so if you want to get the rich, saturated colours in a print ProPhoto is likely an appropriate choice. Working with a 16-bit depth is assumed in all cases.

The trade-off between Adobe RGB and ProPhoto RGB is that the spacing between individual hues is wider in ProPhoto and if the colours are pushed to hard, artifacts can result. In my thousands of edits, I've only had that happen once, so ProPhoto tends to be my default. That being said, an image that does not have the highly saturated colours that ProPhoto covers can safely be done in Adobe RGB. The only time one should edit in sRGB is when one is working with a file that is in the sRGB colour space. I have had that happen on occasion where someone has supplied me files for printing that were in the sRGB colour space.

The work flow that has been recommended to me by a number of high end printers is to do all edits in a wide gamut colour space to create a master file that is full-size. That master file is then resized to output size, whether that be screen or print, output sharpened at that size. If you are planning to post to the web, this is where you would do your sRGB conversion. If you are looking at using a commercial print service, they generally are looking for 8-bit JPEG files in the sRGB colour space. Chromogenic and digital press printers are sRGB devices.

I assume that these output are throw-aways and get rid of them right after I have finished using them. The master files get saved and stored for re-use.

When it comes to rendering intents, Canon recommends using Perceptual when you want the image to look like what you see on your screen and relative colorimetric if you want it to look close to the original image. Perceptual is the default rendering intent for images on both PC and Mac computers.


https://support.usa.canon.com/kb/ind...B002&actp=LIST

[DanK]

Manfred,

Sorry that my question was too vague and took up your time. I understand your post, and I do all of my processing in the widest gamut available.

I was simply asking a technical follow-up to Ted's suggestion that I avoid crushed colors online by editing in sRGB for online postings. The problem in this case is that the edits were perfectly fine in a wider gamut, but colors were crushed when I posted it here. I assumed that it was exporting in sRGB that caused the problem, not something subsequent that happened when I posted to Smugmug or linked to CiC from Smugmug, although I haven't checked that. So my question is whether it would have made much difference if the conversion to sRGB occurred earlier in the process, assuming that I were to do similar edits to the sRGB file.

As I explained to Ted, at least for the most part, I don't intend to do a second set of edits this way; I considered it when I bought a wide gamut monitor and decided against it for the reasons in my earlier post. However, I do wonder about the technical question. I think the answer is "yes," but I may set aside time to test it at some point.

Dan