PDA

View Full Version : Hibiscus



Norm Dulak
08-28-2010, 08:31 AM
Nikon D300 w/105mm f/2.8 VRII Micro-Nikkor lens, HH
Nikon R1 twin strobes
ISO Eq 200; MM -2
1/800 sec @ f/7.1
PP PS CS 5: levels; curves; some cloning, to completely darken the bkg and to remove minor flower blemishes; very minor cropping off the bottom and right side

Another gem from Longwood Gardens. Somewhat oof foliage is present in the RAW file that I feel could have been retained in the PS file to produce a good image. But I went with a completely black bkg in this posting, to dramatize the brilliance of the blossom. I also could have brightened the leaves of the plant but felt that they as is made a better transition to the black bkg.

The beauty of the blossom and the two complementary buds made this flower irresistible to me.

Norm

Jerry van Dijk
08-28-2010, 12:00 PM
Hi Norm, a wonderful flower indeed! I like your composition. I would have preferred that the stem was free of the frame, but that's no dealbreaker for me. The flower looks a bit flat (as in: without depth) to me. It almost looks like it was painted. This may have to do with the fact that you have considerable clipping in the reds.

Norm Dulak
08-28-2010, 01:35 PM
Hi Norm, a wonderful flower indeed! I like your composition. I would have preferred that the stem was free of the frame, but that's no dealbreaker for me. The flower looks a bit flat (as in: without depth) to me. It almost looks like it was painted. This may have to do with the fact that you have considerable clipping in the reds.

Jerry:

Thanks for your comments. I'm a bit confused by your suggestion, however, that there is considerable clipping in the reds. I don't see how there could be, unless something weird happened during conversion from the PS file to the web image.

That's because whenever I photograph anything with strong reds or yellows, I immediately review the captured image and evaluate the histograms. The LCD on my D300 camera is set to not only display the captured image, but four separate histograms also, for the red, green and blue channels plus overall luminance. In an earlier frame there was in fact some clipping of the reds, and that is why I applied a strong -2 compensation to my camera's matrix metering to get the present, correctly exposed frame. Wonderful things, those histograms!:D

As for your impression that the image is a bit flat, I'm afraid that goes with the territory of twin strobe photography. But there are so many advantages to it that I use it a lot now for flower photography.

Norm

Kaushik Balakumar
08-28-2010, 01:53 PM
Excellent texture in the petals. Just the apt DOF to keep the entire flower in DOF.
I agree with your choice to leave the leaves a bit darker than the rest.
Might de-saturate the reds a little bit for my tastes.

Norm Dulak
08-28-2010, 02:56 PM
It almost looks like it was painted. This may have to do with the fact that you have considerable clipping in the reds.

Jerry:

This is further to my previous reply to your comments in which I explained in some detail why, unless something weird happened during conversion of my PS file to the web image that I posted, the reds could not be clipped. Apparently, something weird did happen then!!:(

What I've done is to open and view the histograms of both my original RAW file (the PS file histogram was essentially the same as that of the RAW file) and my posted JPEG file in PS CS5. Then, I made screen shots of the CS5 histograms for the two images, opened the screen shots in CS5, selected and copied both of them, and combined the two histograms in a new PS file for comparison, with the results shown below.

And indeed, Jerry, you were right! For some reason there is clipping in the reds of the web image! My sincere apologies for not checking for this problem, but I never expected clipping to be introduced by web image conversion, and so I never thought to look :2eyes2: for it before posting!

The take-home message is that anyone planning to post an image in which red/yellow clipping might become a problem should check their web image histograms prior to posting. That's true even if the histograms of your underlying RAW and PS files revealed no clipping problems!:cheers:

Norm

Jerry van Dijk
08-28-2010, 03:45 PM
Hi Norm, I was bothered by the lack of detail in the purple shadows under the petals and the red markings, so I downloaded the image to check the histogram for clipping. It looked like the right one!
The two histograms you post alsmost look like Adobe RGB (usually the standard option for RAW image editing in PS) vs. sRGB. Conversion to sRGB can be the standard option when using the 'Save for web' option in PS. See whether the box 'Convert to sRGB' in the 'Save for web' setting screen is ticked or not.

Norm Dulak
08-28-2010, 04:29 PM
Hi Norm, I was bothered by the lack of detail in the purple shadows under the petals and the red markings, so I downloaded the image to check the histogram for clipping. It looked like the right one!
The two histograms you post alsmost look like Adobe RGB (usually the standard option for RAW image editing in PS) vs. sRGB. Conversion to sRGB can be the standard option when using the 'Save for web' option in PS. See whether the box 'Convert to sRGB' in the 'Save for web' setting screen is ticked or not.

Jerry:

The "Convert to sRGB" box is most definitely checked, as I expected. But are you saying that it is because Adobe RGB is converted to sRGB for the web that this clipping problem occurs? Isn't it necessary to do that because some web browsers cannot handle the wider color gamut of Adobe RGB? Or could one instead uncheck that box, and post an Adobe RGB file that would still look good on the vast majority of computer monitors?

What I find odd is the fact that if I open my posted web image in PS CS5, I get the image shown on the right above. Yet if I open the same web image with Adobe Camera Raw, I get a histogram that shows no evidence of red clipping!:confused: How can that be?

Norm

Jay Sheinfield
08-28-2010, 11:47 PM
Norm,

I can't speak to the color space problem, just wanted to chime on the nice image. I concur with the dark leaves. Wonderful comp. Beautiful flower. I am amazed at the DOF you achieved at f/7.1 ;).

Roman Kurywczak
08-29-2010, 08:50 PM
Hey Norm,
Can't explain why it happens....but yeah....reds and yellows can be a pain! Many times with any contrast boost (levels, curves, LCE, BC, or even selective color)....reds and yellows are first to go! I always have to tame them more! I like the comp....with the darker greens.....very fortunate with the DOF too.....sharp where it needs it.....would definitely sacrifice the SS for the dof in the future!

Norm Dulak
08-30-2010, 05:49 AM
Hey Norm,
Can't explain why it happens....but yeah....reds and yellows can be a pain! Many times with any contrast boost (levels, curves, LCE, BC, or even selective color)....reds and yellows are first to go! I always have to tame them more! I like the comp....with the darker greens.....very fortunate with the DOF too.....sharp where it needs it.....would definitely sacrifice the SS for the dof in the future!

Roman:

Many thanks for your comments!

But with regard to DOF, I've gotten into the habit where I plenty of time (as I do at Longwood Gardens) of shooting each interesting subject at a range of f stops. In this case I have files of the hibiscus ranging from f/5.6 to f/32. I chose the f/7.1 exposure for this posting, because I wanted to relegate the buds to a slightly less prominent position than the blossom, on the basis of focus.

Norm

Roman Kurywczak
08-30-2010, 06:16 AM
That's a great habit to get into Norm whenever possible!

Norm Dulak
08-30-2010, 09:47 AM
Thanks to everyone for looking and commenting! Watch those yellows and reds :2eyes2: when you post, and if you find a really good way to deal with them, please give me a PM!!!!!;)

Norm

Jerry van Dijk
08-30-2010, 01:58 PM
But are you saying that it is because Adobe RGB is converted to sRGB for the web that this clipping problem occurs? Isn't it necessary to do that because some web browsers cannot handle the wider color gamut of Adobe RGB? Or could one instead uncheck that box, and post an Adobe RGB file that would still look good on the vast majority of computer monitors?


Hi Norm, it might be that the gamut range is so wide that converting to sRGB results in clipping, even when corrected. I had a similar problem when I sent an Adobe RGB image to a printing service. Apparently they had automatically converted the color range to sRGB before printing the image, with clipped reds and oranges as a result on the print. You could post an Adobe RGB image, but only browsers that use color profiles, such as Firefox, will display the image correctly. IE explorer users will see a washed out image.
I'm not sure what happens with the image in ACR, but I see the same thing happening in ACR in CS4. Seems like the clipped data are stored with the image and converted back to Adobe RGB when you open the image in ACR. Maybe you could post this in the tech forum, there are plenty of experts on color range hanging out there.

Norm Dulak
08-30-2010, 05:10 PM
Based upon what Jerry and Roman have said, it seems to me that the best idea would be for all BPN members/participants to acknowledge that the clipping of reds or yellows might be beyond our control, and could even be a result of color space conversion during preparation for posting. As a consequence, I suggest that red/yellow clipping should rarely, if ever, be a basis for criticism of a posted image.

Norm

Roman Kurywczak
08-30-2010, 05:28 PM
Based upon what Jerry and Roman have said, it seems to me that the best idea would be for all BPN members/participants to acknowledge that the clipping of reds or yellows might be beyond our control, and could even be a result of color space conversion during preparation for posting. As a consequence, I suggest that red/yellow clipping should rarely, if ever, be a basis for criticism of a posted image.

Norm

I strongly disagree! I have posted images with no clipped red or yellow in my original......yet when I did my PP'ing work.....it was clipped.....live and learn. The Member or participant needs to learn how to present it for his or her camera....and the intended output! Why??? All contest or publications have rules.......you need to follow them. As a critiquer......I can't assume that this was done in the conversion process.....I can only judge what I see! It is your responsibility to post an image that fits the guidelines of the forum.....all of which are different! I can't base my opinion on something unknown.....because a ton of people have posted imeges that were not blown on the yellows or reds!!! Welcome to the digital age.....many requirements for many output sources. Let me ask you this Norm......Do you think and editor would give 2 cents....as to what your output method would be???......why whould BPN or any other photo comunity? Please don't take this too harshly.....ask yourself this.....why would you assume it was done right? too many times it is quite the opposite!

Don Lacy
08-30-2010, 06:07 PM
Based upon what Jerry and Roman have said, it seems to me that the best idea would be for all BPN members/participants to acknowledge that the clipping of reds or yellows might be beyond our control, and could even be a result of color space conversion during preparation for posting. As a consequence, I suggest that red/yellow clipping should rarely, if ever, be a basis for criticism of a posted image.

Norm
Hi Norm, The clipping happens during conversion from Adobe or Pro RGB to sRGB do to the smaller color space or gamut of sRGB most notable in reds, pinks, and yellows here is a good article on color spaces and does a much better job of explaining them then I could http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml.
The way I prevent clipping before posting to the web is to convert to sRGB before saving to the web which can be done under the edit menu in PS just go to convert to profile and select sRGB from the drop down menu if their is clipping I correct it then I save for web

Norm Dulak
08-30-2010, 06:14 PM
Hi Norm, The clipping happens during conversion from Adobe or Pro RGB to sRGB do to the smaller color space or gamut of sRGB most notable in reds, pinks, and yellows here is a good article on color spaces and does a much better job of explaining them then I could http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml.
The way I prevent clipping before posting to the web is to convert to sRGB before saving to the web which can be done under the edit menu in PS just go to convert to profile and select sRGB from the drop down menu if their is clipping I correct it then I save for web

Thanks a million for your comments Don! They are very helpful and I'm sure will be of interest to everyone. And I've bookmarked your link!:)

Roman Kurywczak
08-30-2010, 06:19 PM
Hey Norm,
I guess I do owe you an apology....because unbeknown to you.....I did ask my fellow mods if they thought I was harsh......and they agreed yes! So.....I won't edit my response.....but I will offer an apology! I should have phrased it better based on our guidelines!!! I know Canon has this problem more than Nikon cameras....in the red channel....so I should have gone more in depth to the issues you may encounter.....and there i was wrong! I still do believe that you need to be aware of the issue in the forums....but I could have phrased it better!!! Sorry about that and will try to keep that in mind for the future!

James Shadle
08-30-2010, 06:41 PM
Norm,
The original image was under-exposed.
I have two questions. Did you use levels or curves to bring the image "up" in post processing?
What was your white balance set at?
Thanks

Cheryl Flory
08-30-2010, 07:54 PM
this is a great thread! I am learning a lot. Thank you, everyone, who took the time to respond on clipping with so much information. It is helpful to a lot of us!

Don Lacy
08-30-2010, 08:47 PM
I know Canon has this problem more than Nikon cameras....in the red channel....so I should have gone more in depth to the issues you may encounter
The clipping did not occur during capture it is solely caused by switching color spaces from Adobe RGB to sRGB if you read Norms post and look at the histograms he posted he had no issue with clipping until he posted the image this can happen no matter what make of camera you use to take the image.

Roger Clark
08-30-2010, 10:56 PM
I'll add my 2 cents. I agree with Don. I have observed (all too often) that I have a great exposure and the histogram looks great and then I convert from Adobe RGB to sRGB for the web and the brighter colors saturate and the shadows get clipped. Very frustrating. There is no simple solution, as it is like trying to stuff a large package in a small box, and the smaller box won't give. The example in this thread is one of the largest shifts in the reds that I've seen.

I think we have discussed this effect in the workflow forum.

Roger

Jerry van Dijk
08-31-2010, 02:23 AM
As a consequence, I suggest that red/yellow clipping should rarely, if ever, be a basis for criticism of a posted image.

Norm

Ha, I wish they would let us get away that easy....;)! I was playing with the tought that to solve the issue you should edit the image directly into sRGB colorspace, but you'll probably loose a lot of information, plus you'd have to do a separate image edit just to post on the web, which seems ab it of a waste of time...

Norm Dulak
08-31-2010, 03:38 AM
I'll add my 2 cents. I agree with Don. I have observed (all too often) that I have a great exposure and the histogram looks great and then I convert from Adobe RGB to sRGB for the web and the brighter colors saturate and the shadows get clipped. Very frustrating. There is no simple solution, as it is like trying to stuff a large package in a small box, and the smaller box won't give. The example in this thread is one of the largest shifts in the reds that I've seen.

I think we have discussed this effect in the workflow forum.

Roger

And to think this all began after I photographed what I thought was an attractive flower at Longwood Gardens, and decided to share it with others in exchange for a few constructive comments!!!!!:( While I appreciate the efforts of many of you to explain what has happened here, I'm afraid that I can't contribute much more to the discussion than I already have.

Don Hamilton Jr.
08-31-2010, 06:08 AM
Norm, actually, this is a great topic, and great oppurtunity for us to all learn. I had no idea this happens, and how to fix it, so this is exactly what we need. You have a solid photo, and a great one at that! This is just a discusson to get'r over the top, and on the list as a winner image!!
Perhaps, after reading the article, i'll get it , however i'm trying to figure out the workflow here, so i can incorporate it into the PP .Am i correct, so as per Don L, check for clipping fix it prior to saving on the web by converting the profile????
Thks all, and Big thks to Norm for posting a beautiful image!

Linda Dulak
08-31-2010, 06:30 AM
I, too, am trying to get my head around this problem. As said before, the reds were not clipped in the original and Norm purposely tested the exposure until they were not clipped. I, too, would like to understand how one processes such an image for web presentation. From Roger's comments, I'm thinking that it may not be possible to accurately present such an image. It appears to me that it can be compared to the dynamic range of some images which cannot be successfully represented in one image, thus the use of HDR. So, an image that can be captured in AdobeRGB -- and printed in that gamut -- may not be able to be presented properly in the reduced gamut of sRGB on the web. Is that the bottom line?

Linda

Don Lacy
08-31-2010, 06:32 AM
Ha, I wish they would let us get away that easy....;)! I was playing with the tought that to solve the issue you should edit the image directly into sRGB colorspace, but you'll probably loose a lot of information, plus you'd have to do a separate image edit just to post on the web, which seems ab it of a waste of time...
If you do not plan on printing the image you can go that route or you can convert to sRGB before saving the image and correct any clipping then.Here is a quick correction using curves on the red channel only.

Norm Dulak
08-31-2010, 07:27 AM
If you do not plan on printing the image you can go that route or you can convert to sRGB before saving the image and correct any clipping then.Here is a quick correction using curves on the red channel only.

Thanks Don for the repost and your suggestion. Maybe a last-minute red channel curves correction is a good way to go. Your positive contribution to this important discussion beats the pants off of scathing criticisms that are devoid of possible solutions for rectifying the problem!

Roger Clark
08-31-2010, 08:36 AM
Linda,

You are correct. By the definition of gamut, when one converts an image from a wide gamut to a smaller gamut, something has to give. The situation tends to occur more if you have an image with strong colors and you boost the contrast and/or saturation. Don L's repost does help a little but contrast is reduced slightly. It would be better to do the fix in the wide gamut color space and then convert to sRGB. But any such fix means squeezing the colors into a small range, and that generally reduces contrast.

This is my opinion and others may disagree. While I'll try and not blow one channel, sometimes to maintain overall contrast I feel it is better to sacrifice some out of gamut for the impact of the image. Often the other channels will have enough variation to show interesting tonality. It is important to no saturate too many channels (e.g. yellow is saturation of red + green), nor to saturate luminance. As long as luminance stays on scale, the image can show nice subtle details even though there are no color variations.

I have some fall color images shot on 4x5 velvia that are out of gamut even in Adobe RGB but large prints are stunning. e.g.:
http://www.clarkvision.com/galleries/gallery.large_format/web/colorado.fall-c09.30.2003.L4.9362b-700.html

Roger

James Shadle
08-31-2010, 09:37 AM
How does this look?
Levels adjustment and selective color adjustment only.
I'm sure a few more minutes and the image would look even better.
My point is you can get your reds under control.

PS Photo Filter can be affective as well.

Roger Clark
08-31-2010, 10:17 AM
On my uncalibrated laptop monitor, it looks flat. I like the original and Don's repost, although I think working the original in Adboe RGB then convert to sRGB may result in the best (compromise). Norm, based on the thread, want to give it a try in stuffing your wide gamut image into sRGB without saturating the reds? I would like to see that.

Roger

Norm Dulak
08-31-2010, 10:59 AM
How does this look?
Levels adjustment and selective color adjustment only.
I'm sure a few more minutes and the image would look even better.
My point is you can get your reds under control.

PS Photo Filter can be affective as well.

The problem as I see it is that the blossom was red, not yellow.;) The reds are under control, because they're essentially gone.

Norm Dulak
08-31-2010, 12:54 PM
I've taken another shot at it and may have succeeded. What I did was to make a copy of my original posted image in PS CS5, open a "Vibrance" adjustment layer, and then apply a very modest adjustment in that layer. The Vibrance AL has two sliders, vibrance and saturation. Looking at my histogram while experimenting, I found that moving the vibrance slider did not help. But a very slight, -5 adjustment of the saturation slider abolished the clipping of the red curve.

Viewing the original image and the repost image side-by-side in Bridge showed no significant difference in the appearance of the two images. But the clipping was gone in the repost. The result is shown in this repost.

Might this not be a useful approach to consider?

Jerry van Dijk
08-31-2010, 03:41 PM
Hi Norm, your repost looks better. When you look at the real red parts (e.g. in the shadow on the lower petal, the shadow cast by the upper petal, the area just above the flower center) you see more detail showing up. When you blow up the image, you'll see that you didn't really recover the details in the reds themselves (as you can see in your histogram), but just created more room for details in other colors (such as purple and orange). Still, I think it makes a difference and helps reducing the 'flat' look I commented on for the original image, by bringing up more shadow detail.
I do find your saturation adjustment detrimental to all those other wonderful colors you managed to capture. I took a different approach, and only desaturated the red channel by 5 points. See how you like it. It comes close to Don's repost, so it seems there are more ways to get here!
If you really want to get crazy, you could try to desaturate only the reds in the original Adobe RGB image in ACR and then convert to sRGB. With a little trial and error, you should be able to find the saturation level in which no clipping occurs anymore after conversion, while saving as much of the details as possible.
By the way, I totally agree with Roger that having no clipping of any color in an image is not a goal in itself. If you don't need the details in the clipped color, or when there were no details in that color anyway, it's no problem. The flower in my avatar, for example, also suffered from severe clipping of the reds, which was noticable in the petals. But since they were very smooth without any detailed textures, I left the clipping in favour of the nice saturation in the other colors. In your wonderful flower closeup, however, I feel we need all the detail on those intricate textures on the petals we can get :)!

Don Lacy
08-31-2010, 04:26 PM
This is my opinion and others may disagree. While I'll try and not blow one channel, sometimes to maintain overall contrast I feel it is better to sacrifice some out of gamut for the impact of the image
My thoughts exactly, when I convert to sRGB I look for color shifts if none occur I will not bother to fix any clipping that is caused from the smaller gamut and i do not believe anyone has commented on clipping in any of my posted images( this might change now in the future)


If you really want to get crazy, you could try to desaturate only the reds in the original Adobe RGB image in ACR and then convert to sRGB. With a little trial and error, you should be able to find the saturation level in which no clipping occurs anymore after conversion, while saving as much of the details as possible.
This is what i would have done if I had the original file but I would still do it in PS not ACR BTW both repost from you and Norm look good to me:)

Norm Dulak
08-31-2010, 04:54 PM
Jerry and Don:

I appreciate the thoughtful way both of you have approached the problem, and your willingness to accept some degree of clipping to produce a better image. That is very good food for thought!:D And I like Jerry's repost also.

But Roger, I don't think I'll try that!:p I have enough trouble forcing square pegs into round holes!

Norm

Anita Bower
09-01-2010, 05:44 AM
I like the original post, Don Lacy's post and your repost, though, I must say, I can't tell much difference between them. I like the painterly look, the details, the swirls, the lines, the colors. I think you made the right decision to keep the greens toned down a bit, thus highlighting the flowers. Beautiful flower and beautiful capture.

Cheryl Flory
09-01-2010, 09:11 AM
Is there less problem with clipping happening, if you shoot in sRGB?

Don Lacy
09-01-2010, 09:40 AM
Is there less problem with clipping happening, if you shoot in sRGB?
No sRGB is a smaller color space then Adobe RGB and thus it is easier to clip certain colors mainly red and yellows. sRGB has fewer crayons in the box then Adobe RGB which has fewer crayons then Pro RGB in a perfect digital world for photographers all browsers would be colored manage and able to read profiles and everyone would view our images on wide gamut monitors and we would not have to deal with the limitations of sRGB.

Norm Dulak
09-01-2010, 09:47 AM
Is there less problem with clipping happening, if you shoot in sRGB?

Cheryl:

Regardless of the color space you work in with your camera, you can get clipping if you don't expose correctly. But because the reds and yellows are especially problematic, try to review your images immediately with a histogram that covers the red curve separately if possible, and then shoot again after applying appropriate exposure compensation if you see clipping in the histogram.

But I would never shoot in sRGB, because it sacrifices too much of the broad color spectrum. Use the full Adobe RGB when shooting, and then follow the suggestions posted above to eliminate problems occurring during conversion to sRGB, for web posting or otherwise.

Norm

Cheryl Flory
09-01-2010, 09:50 AM
Thanks for your reply, Don. I understand the difference between sRGB, RGB, and Pro RGB.


I currently shoot RGB for the wider gamut. So far, I can not find a printer that uses RGB. and from what I understand, browsers use sRGB, is that right? So what I am asking is, what is the benefit from shooting RGB if printers and browsers can't process it?

Is the only benefit from shooting RGB really for any possible future development in printers etc???

Cheryl Flory
09-01-2010, 09:54 AM
Thank you, Norm. I use the exposure histogram. I will have to learn how to use the color histogram and how to adjust for reds and yellows.

Norm, when do you use RGB in your final image, if not for posting? Have you found a printer that uses RGB instead of changing RGB file to sRGB before printing???

Don Lacy
09-01-2010, 10:10 AM
Thanks for your reply, Don. I understand the difference between sRGB, RGB, and Pro RGB.


I currently shoot RGB for the wider gamut. So far, I can not find a printer that uses RGB. and from what I understand, browsers use sRGB, is that right? So what I am asking is, what is the benefit from shooting RGB if printers and browsers can't process it?

Is the only benefit from shooting RGB really for any possible future development in printers etc???
All inkjet printers are capable of printing colors in the pro RGB spectrum and more then capable of covering the Adobe color space so I am not sure why you believe otherwise. Here is a good arctical I linked in a earlier post that explains the advantages of using Pro RGB http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tu...hoto-rgb.shtml.

Cheryl Flory
09-01-2010, 10:14 AM
Don, I should have been more precise. I can not find a professional/business that prints using RGB. I do not have my own printer.

Do you know of a printing company that uses RGB?

Don Lacy
09-01-2010, 10:21 AM
Cherly, I have to leave for work now I will post you some links to the labs I use later.

Norm Dulak
09-01-2010, 11:21 AM
Thank you, Norm. I use the exposure histogram. I will have to learn how to use the color histogram and how to adjust for reds and yellows.

Norm, when do you use RGB in your final image, if not for posting? Have you found a printer that uses RGB instead of changing RGB file to sRGB before printing???

Cheryl:

I use RGB for printing, and I have an Epson Stylus Photo R1800 printer. It lets Photoshop control color, so I don't think there is any conversion from RGB. My understanding is that commercial printers may convert RGB to CMYK, or ask you to do it for them. The two major uses for sRGB that I am aware of are for web images and projection.

I hope that helps.

Don Lacy
09-01-2010, 10:19 PM
Don, I should have been more precise. I can not find a professional/business that prints using RGB. I do not have my own printer.

Do you know of a printing company that uses RGB?
Hi Cheryl, Here are the two labs I use the most the first is West Coast imaging their web site can be found here http://www.westcoastimaging.com/wci/page/services/products.html they are a high end lab and if I want the very best prints I use them especially for inkjet and BW go to their FAQ section and you can find a wealth of information on preparing your files for printing. The other lab I use is Aspen Creek http://www.aspencreekphoto.com/ they are an off shoot of West Coast imaging with very reasonable prices and great if you know how to prepare your files and want to print on glossy or pearl paper, they also have a great FAQ section. I do not know what lab you are using but if they only accept sRGB files then they are probably using an older Lightjet or Fuji Frontier printer and really should find a lab with more up to date printers capable of using the wider gamut color spaces.

Desmond Chan
09-23-2010, 12:48 AM
Is there less problem with clipping happening, if you shoot in sRGB?

If you shoot in jpeg, probably. If you shoot RAW, you can use any color space you want during processing. The choice of color space in your camera has no effect on the RAW files. It does help in viewing your image on the LCD screen of your camera and checking for blinkies aka clipping.

Sorry that I found this thread through an on-going discussion somewhere :o:p

Michael Gerald-Yamasaki
09-26-2010, 11:21 PM
Norm,

Greetings. Found this thread from another discussion (like Desmond ;) ).

First I want to say, I think this image is beautiful. I really like the color.

Which leads me to this... The OP image does not have blown reds. I cannot explain the histograms that show there are blown reds. But I believe the histograms that show blown reds are wrong. (wrong, wrong, wrong!)

If you don't believe me, take the sampler tool and find me some pixels that show red to be at 255. Or import your OP into Lightroom and look at that histogram. The LR histogram resembles your RAW histogram, not exactly the same, but the reds are far from blown.

Aside from all that, the reds just don't look blown. One take away from all this is that histograms have their idiosyncrasies... the algorithms used have a lot of short cuts for speed and are sometimes just wrong. Multiple ways of evaluating IQ are good.

Cheers,

-Michael-

Norm Dulak
09-27-2010, 06:15 AM
Norm,

Greetings. Found this thread from another discussion (like Desmond ;) ).

First I want to say, I think this image is beautiful. I really like the color.

Which leads me to this... The OP image does not have blown reds. I cannot explain the histograms that show there are blown reds. But I believe the histograms that show blown reds are wrong. (wrong, wrong, wrong!)

If you don't believe me, take the sampler tool and find me some pixels that show red to be at 255. Or import your OP into Lightroom and look at that histogram. The LR histogram resembles your RAW histogram, not exactly the same, but the reds are far from blown.

Aside from all that, the reds just don't look blown. One take away from all this is that histograms have their idiosyncrasies... the algorithms used have a lot of short cuts for speed and are sometimes just wrong. Multiple ways of evaluating IQ are good.

Cheers,

-Michael-

Michael:

Thanks so much for your comments! Those histograms certainly have led to a lively discussion here. But the bottom line is that I'm pleased that you like the image! :)

Norm