Resizing a cropped image..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bnnrcn

Hi Manfred,while converting working color space from Adobe RGB to sRGB,there are so many sRGBs such as sRGB IEC61966-2.1,wscRGB,wsRGB,e-sRGB.I'm confused about which one to choose:confused: I might as well choose sRGB IEC61966-2.1 but I want to make sure.(BTW this is in ACR part,while downsizing and saving.)

---

I never work in sRGB. My default setting for Photoshop is AdobeRGB and I convert to sRGB IEC61966-2.1 only when I plan to display in the internet or use a commercial printer. I believe this is the most commonly use sRGB colour space.

My computer screen handles most of the AdobeRGB colour space (97% I believe) so I work in that or higher (for example ProPhoto).

To expand on Manfred's comment on hosting services and contrary to what I said in another thread...I use http://s329.photobucket.com/
I stated earlier that it was the conversion itself that boosted the saturation...I misspoke.

After running some tests where I grabbed a screenshot of one of my images published on the web and compared it to my original "save for web" images, I found that Photobucket was boosting my saturation about 15-20% when viewed in IE. As a result, my workflow is...
Convert profile from ProPhoto to sRGB and make adjustments if needed, including decreasing saturation by that 15%>resize to 150ppi and 6.666" on long side>Save for Web at maximum quality. Applying sharpening is generally something that slips my mind. :eek:

As I've said before that, IMHO, judging IQ based on a published web image, is an exercise in futility. ;)

Thank you Boyer:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by chauncey

To expand on Manfred's comment on hosting services and contrary to what I said in another thread...I use http://s329.photobucket.com/
I stated earlier that it was the conversion itself that boosted the saturation...I misspoke.

After running some tests where I grabbed a screenshot of one of my images published on the web and compared it to my original "save for web" images, I found that Photobucket was boosting my saturation about 15-20% when viewed in IE. As a result, my workflow is...
Convert profile from ProPhoto to sRGB and make adjustments if needed, including decreasing saturation by that 15%>resize to 150ppi and 6.666" on long side>Save for Web at maximum quality. Applying sharpening is generally something that slips my mind. :eek:

As I've said before that, IMHO, judging IQ based on a published web image, is an exercise in futility. ;)

---

Thank you Manfred,may be I didn't use the correct sentence while asking my question,excuse my english:o I was talking about saving as jpg at the end of the workflow to display in the internet and changing the colour space at that stage (it is in the 'save options'),so you have made me clear that I have to use sRGB IEC61966-2.1. Colour space in the 'workflow options' is Adobe RGB and I don't change it at all,no problem with that :).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

I never work in sRGB. My default setting for Photoshop is AdobeRGB and I convert to sRGB IEC61966-2.1 only when I plan to display in the internet or use a commercial printer. I believe this is the most commonly use sRGB colour space.

My computer screen handles most of the AdobeRGB colour space (97% I believe) so I work in that or higher (for example ProPhoto).

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bnnrcn

Thank you Manfred,may be I didn't use the correct sentence while asking my question,excuse my english:o I was talking about saving as jpg at the end of the workflow to display in the internet and changing the colour space at that stage (it is in the 'save options'),so you have made me clear that I have to use sRGB IEC61966-2.1. Colour space in the 'workflow options' is Adobe RGB and I don't change it at all,no problem with that :).

---

Okay Binnur - a bit of background. Your camera is capable of recording data as 12-bit or 14-bit RAW data, and the sRGB colour space can effectively be described using just 8-bits; i.e. some 16 million distinct colours. This is really what the internet is all about; decent colour space that allows for relatively small files. Nominally, even the least expensive TN computer screens should be able to do a decent job displaying sRGB colours

In order to be able to access all of the other colours that your camera has captured, a larger colour space should be used. Higher end computer (IPS) screens can display most of the AdobeRGB colour space, so if you can dsiplay it, why not use it (although this is a very major oversimplification). This generally applies to the more vivid end of the green and blue colours; the various enhanced colour spaces are capable of brighter, more electric greens and blues than sRGB (the difference in the red channel is quite small). A value of 0,255,0 or 0,0,255 will look different in AdobeRGB (as well as ProPhoto RGB and ColorMatch RGB) than they will in sRGB, so when you are planning to show your image on the internet, the final piece of workflow should be to remap the image colours from whatever gamut you are using to sRGB, to ensure that the colours do not look muted.

One other thing about colours; when using

Thank you Manfred,I understand your explanation except for the values about red channel because I'm not in to PS CC that much yet:o Your explanation makes me wonder about one more thing about 'workflow options' in ACR.When I open a raw image in ACR,the 'colour space' in the workflow options is Adobe RGB and I don't change it.But 'depth' is 8 bits/channel.I think I should have changed it to 16 bit which I haven't done so far:o This is a mistake ,isn't it?I remember in one of my old threads people were telling me I was going down to 8 bits and losing some information while saving as jpgs.So,if I don't change the depth to 16 bit,I'm working with 8 bits depth,right in the beginning even with a raw image.Even if I open a jpg image in ACR,I have the option to change depth from 8 bits to 16 bits.So,what is the correct depth for raw and jpg images in ACR workflow options?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

Okay Binnur - a bit of background. Your camera is capable of recording data as 12-bit or 14-bit RAW data, and the sRGB colour space can effectively be described using just 8-bits; i.e. some 16 million distinct colours. This is really what the internet is all about; decent colour space that allows for relatively small files. Nominally, even the least expensive TN computer screens should be able to do a decent job displaying sRGB colours

In order to be able to access all of the other colours that your camera has captured, a larger colour space should be used. Higher end computer (IPS) screens can display most of the AdobeRGB colour space, so if you can dsiplay it, why not use it (although this is a very major oversimplification). This generally applies to the more vivid end of the green and blue colours; the various enhanced colour spaces are capable of brighter, more electric greens and blues than sRGB (the difference in the red channel is quite small). A value of 0,255,0 or 0,0,255 will look different in AdobeRGB (as well as ProPhoto RGB and ColorMatch RGB) than they will in sRGB, so when you are planning to show your image on the internet, the final piece of workflow should be to remap the image colours from whatever gamut you are using to sRGB, to ensure that the colours do not look muted.

One other thing about colours; when using

---

First of all, yes, use the 16-bit functionality in ACR and Photoshop, otherwise you are throwing away a lot of data.

The red channel comment comes from this diagram:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_space


The red channel for AdobeRBG and sRGB are roughly the same, whereas the blue and green channels have a different colour at the maximum value of a "pure" colour.

Thank you Manfred,do I still have to choose 16 bits even if I edit a jpg image taken with the camera? Do the cameras produce jpg files with 16 bits ?I know that after saving a raw image as jpg ,the file becomes 8 bits by losing information but I don't know if a jpg image SOOC is 8 bits or 16 bits.If the cameras produce jpg images with 8 bits then there is no point in changing the depth to 16 bits in workoptions for such a file.Am I correct?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

First of all, yes, use the 16-bit functionality in ACR and Photoshop, otherwise you are throwing away a lot of data.

The red channel comment comes from this diagram:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_space


The red channel for AdobeRBG and sRGB are roughly the same, whereas the blue and green channels have a different colour at the maximum value of a "pure" colour.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bnnrcn

Thank you Manfred,do I still have to choose 16 bits even if I edit a jpg image taken with the camera? Do the cameras produce jpg files with 16 bits ?I know that after saving a raw image as jpg ,the file becomes 8 bits by losing information but I don't know if a jpg image SOOC is 8 bits or 16 bits.If the cameras produce jpg images with 8 bits then there is no point in changing the depth to 16 bits in workoptions for such a file.Am I correct?

---

No, your jpegs will be 8-bit, so no need for a 16-bit workflow.

Thank you Manfred,I looked at the website you gave me about the colorspace and I found out that ProPhoto has got the widest range of colours.So,why don't we use ProPhoto instead of AdobeRGB in the workflow options of ACR.Isn't it better?:confused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

No, your jpegs will be 8-bit, so no need for a 16-bit workflow.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bnnrcn

Thank you Manfred,I looked at the website you gave me about the colorspace and I found out that ProPhoto has got the widest range of colours.So,why don't we use ProPhoto instead of AdobeRGB in the workflow options of ACR.Isn't it better?:confused:

---

Why not indeed?

The main problem that I have with ProPhoto is that it's range is outside of what my screen can display. so one is shooting blind. I'm using it now and have not found any specific advantages or disadvantages over AdobeRGB.

Thank you Manfred for being patient with me and answering all my questions.I didn't know digital photography was such a vast subject.Learning never ends in digital world.I will stick with the AdobeRGB like you do.Thanks again for all your help:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

Why not indeed?

The main problem that I have with ProPhoto is that it's range is outside of what my screen can display. so one is shooting blind. I'm using it now and have not found any specific advantages or disadvantages over AdobeRGB.

---

Thank you Manfred for being patient with me and answering all my questions.I didn't know digital photography was such a vast subject.Learning never ends in digital world.I will stick with the AdobeRGB like you do.Thanks again for all your help:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GrumpyDiver

Why not indeed?

The main problem that I have with ProPhoto is that it's range is outside of what my screen can display. so one is shooting blind. I'm using it now and have not found any specific advantages or disadvantages over AdobeRGB.

---