Export for printing: ProPhoto RGB vs DXO Wide Gamut

At the moment I export in ProPhotoRGB from DXO PL to QimageOne for printing (I only shoot raw). I know that my printer (Canon Pro1000) can print in a larger colour gamut than Adobe RGB (tried with both ProPhoto - and AdobeRGB testfiles; differences on paper where immediately very visible. My monitor is full AdobeRGB). Point is ofcourse that in DXO PL I cannot really work/“see” in ProPhoto. So, in a sense I have to work “in the blind” (can not exactly see what’ s going on when exporting in ProPhoto (apart from maybe soft-proofing, which can help a bit).

I know that exporting to printer/printersoftware in DXO Wide Gamut is not yet possible.
I think that when this is possible, I could use that as working colourspace…and also export in same colourspace; not as large as ProPhoto, but still larger than AdobeRGB.
I’ m looking forward to this option…anyone else feel the same way? Or do you stick with ProPhoto, whatever?

1 Like

Export to ProPhoto and you are good to go. :slight_smile:

Agreed. I do just that and then use macOS Preview or ColorSync Utility, or the Canon print and layout utility, to assign the printer profile and print

Without restrictions and (partly) without “knowing” how the end result might look?

Using the correct .icc paper profile (in my case the Hahnemühle paper profiled), I presume . Like I said, I use QimageOne as printing program (love it).

Yes, the same here. It’s the screen that ‘limits’.

Printing the known test samples on my best paper, let it dry overnight and compare the ProPhoto version next to the AdobeRGB one (purposely everything in 16bit !), I could see some differencies like a brighter blue sky, some more intense red, brighter yellow – but that’s it, nothing earth shaking.
[ I even didn’t develop, edit and print my own pics yet in ProPhoto, as my last work was in B&W. ]

Thank you Attaboy. Not sure I understand completely, but I’ m on Mac.

Thank you Wolfgang. To me and in my eyes, the differences between AdobeRGB and ProPhotoRGB in print, look substantial. Maybe I just exaggerate things, but reds/blues and yellows look much better on ProPhoto prints. AdobeRGB is good, but ProPhotoRGB is definitely better. When placed next to each other the differences are remarkable and after a closer look, people around me always pick the ProPhoto print.
I wonder how the results will be when exporting to QimageOne / print as DXO WideGamut. In that case I could both work in DXO WideGamut AND export as such.
I’ ll stick to ProPhoto for the moment (as Joanna does).
My latest prints also where monochrome :wink:

DxO Wide Gamut is a working color space from PL6, but no such output.

note – DxO WG is partly wider than ProPhoto, but also different

ProPhotoRGB vs AdobeRGB vs DCI-P3

the printing reality → ProPhotoRGB vs Canson PlatineFibreRag (P800) vs 1FS_PFLustre (Pro1000)

Thnxs Wolfgang. I know DXO WG is a working colour space. But so is AdobeRGB. I can hope DXO WG will once be possible as export / output as well. Just like AdobeRGB is. That’ s why I wrote “not yet” in my original post.

Colour Gamut.
Most monitors can only handle the standard sRGB. So if you edit in (e.g.) AdobeRGB (which will be fine within the editor) and then export - the colours will look wrong profiled in sRGB.
Example - you edit and profile in AdobeRGB and then send the photos in to the local newspaper - they will print in sRGB and your photos will look utterly disgusting.
Wide gamut AdobeRGB is essentially for silk screen CMYK printers.
Practically no prospective audience can handle anything other than sRGB
Whatever gamut you use during edit, remember to convert it to sRGB and examine it before publishing.

1 Like

This might be the case for screen viewing. This thread is about printing though and other criteria might apply. Printers often go well beyond sRGB in a few areas and a wider gamut can therefore bring out colours that might otherwise be lost or changed.


Hi Jeff – and welcome here.

To whom are you adressing? The OP is on a AdobeRGB screen and his inkjet printer can deliver colours even beyond AdobeRGB.

1 Like

The last graph is useful, but only part of reality. Color spaces should be compared in 3D, not 2D.
E.g. bright green colors are difficult to realize with pigment based inkjet inks, because the cyan pigment often is more “blue” than “cyan”. The slider on the right side of the graph will more or less solve the issue of 2D probably, but you will need several 2D graphs then.

By the way, I’ve never seen a great image turn into a mediocre one when printed in sRGB (prints made with photographic processes will often have a color space even smaller then sRGB), and I have never seen a mediocre image turn into a great one when edited and printed in the widest possible color space.
The same is valid when comparing printing in 8b or 16b color.
A result of working the lion share of my working life in printing R&D :wink:

1 Like

Agree for the 2D and 3D part.
Sure, a mediocre image will not turn great when printed in a larger colour space and vice versa, but I do see great images printed less great in AdobeRGB than in ProPhotoRGB :wink:

Agree with you, Platypus.

Very true Wolfgang

You are right, just difficult to present 3D as screenshot and …

(prints made with photographic processes will often have a color space even smaller then sRGB)

which should still be recognizable. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Talking about large colour spaces…just crossed my mind (and not exactly on topic);
To me and according to information I can find, ProPhotoRGB is the same as ROMM RGB:ISO 22028-2:2013 (because that’ s what I see, when I check the information on the as ProPhoto exported Tiff file).
Do you agree?
ROMM RGB:ISO 22028-2:2013 seems to be “a family” of larger colour spaces (?)

But well, maybe this is worth a whole new thread by its own.

afaik → YES

1 Like