Larger working space than adobe rgb - for not loosing colors our often very expensive sensors provide us

I want to reply but I get such a small edit window for that.
Am I the only one?


No same here

Hi George, the small window was discussed yesterday in another thread, and @sgospodarenko wants to check with the webadmin.


Writing this in notebook and copied to the edit window.
I’m not sure if I understood you well, but here are some thoughts.
ColorManagment is about the consistency how colors look at different output devices.
And then there’s the question of what color gamut. I don’t think a wider gamut means a better gamut. Colors have an analogue value: the frequency or wave length. The color gamut describes the limits to show the colors R,G and B within limits in frequency or wavelength.

Editing an image in sRGB 8 bit does use steps of 1/255 of that range in wavelength. A wider range will result in wider steps. That’s why AdobeRGB uses 16 bit. The steps are still smaller as 8 bit sRGB. All the wider gamuts still use 16 bit, making the steps only bigger.

When editing in a wider gamut as being used on your output device forces you to correct these colors. If all the colors are in the range of the smaller colors then that’s no problem. Otherwise you have to choose how to correct that or how the software is doing that. See @platypus.

During demosaicing no colors are lost.


1 Like

What i think what can be usefull is a visiualisation of the colors which are outside the chosen colorspace, colorproofing.
A colorshoe of the cameracolorspace and a overlay of the chosen colorspace.
This way you can see how far you must compress colors of a certain section.
Now we only have colors in the blinky modes.

As said → Add soft proofing to Photolab - #16 by sankos ( follow also further down)
Converting to ICC colour profile - #3 by wolf
during image export, DxO uses perceptual rendering intent and no black point compensation.

When colours outside of sRGB are detected (e.g. from wider AdobeRGB),
all colours are shifted/squeezed to fit in the smaller sRGB colour space,
while visually keeping their relation → “perceptual”.

The old LR 5.7 has a clever solution to visualize in Softproof mode

  • if the file’s colour space exceeds the monitor’s colour space ( → monitor choice )
    Screen Shot 01-20-22 at 06.29 PM
    (Melissa/ProPhoto RGB vs. AdobeRGB / sRGB)

  • if the file’s colour space exceeds the print’s rendition ( → paper choice )
    Screen Shot 01-20-22 at 06.29 PM 001
    (with profil for my printer & matte paper / RI relative)

I believe TS is reffering to the demosaicing proces. His first post makes me think that he thinks that some clipping occures due to that process and that that can be solved to use a wider gamut. This is not true.


1 Like

Colour space comparison – from practice

I’ll try to show, how the monitor colour spaces

  • ProPhoto RGB
  • AdobeRGB
  • sRGB

compare to the colour rendition of 2 different inkjet print papers

  • Canson Platine Fibre Rag – Semigloss paper (neutral white)
  • Tecco PCR 310 – Matte paper (almost neutral white)

which I actually use with my own profiles / Epson P800.

A. – Monitor colour spaces

  • black – ProPhoto RGB
  • yellow – AdobeRGB
  • white – sRGB

B. – ProPhoto RGB vs. Paper

  • black – ProPhoto RGB
  • yellow – Semigloss paper
  • white – Matte paper

C. – AdobeRGB vs. Paper

  • black – AdobeRGB ( → Eizo CG2730)
  • yellow – Semigloss paper
  • white – Matte paper

D. – sRGB vs. Paper

  • black – sRGB ( → Eizo CG2730 + L767)
  • yellow – Semigloss paper
  • white – Matte paper

B – a monitor with ProPhoto RGB colour space would be ideal :slight_smile:
C – represents my monitor
D – editing in sRGB for web and some printing

Did one of you read the link provided ?
And see samples in this link ?
You should comment on those sample, maybe.

Yes – really old information. :slight_smile:

It’s hard to understand what you want.There’s no relation between the sensor and the color gamut. No lost of colors. Also no lost of colors during demosaicing. The word demosaicing isn’t mentioned in your link, I didn’t find it anyway.
I think we’ve different ideas of how things are working.



(from @OXiDant in post #4 )

Only when you think of using prophoto colorspace in say LR.
And want proceed in prophoto in tiff format.
Then only rawDNG is an option which carry full camera colorspace across dxopl to exportfile.

(from your post #5 )

Did you read the link ?
The point is about high quality printing. And yes, of course you need good monitor to see what you do.
But what’s lost when demosaicing is lost.

… for printing use & export in ProPhoto RGB – and you don’t loose any colour fitting the paper & printer’s colour rendition → see my post #15 → scenario B.

But then for editing, you need a monitor capable of ProPhoto colour space. Otherwise you do a ‘blind flight’ not being able to see highly saturated colours, whether they are captured by your camera’s sensor or as a result from editing → see my post #15 → scenarios C., D.

With different colour spaces one has to handle rendering intents to get a pleasing / satisfying result – hopefully in ‘full sight mode’.

PL’s enhanced printing capability is still limited by the missing softproof.

1 Like

i believe Apple/Mac can show colorspaces and the way a certain image fits in that colorspace non compressed.
i have “softproofing” in Silkypix v10 pro but i can’t see the purpose in the way i see the changes but not if it’s in or out gamut.
i have a sRGB jpeg a AdobeRGB oocjpeg and a raw file
i see saturation changing so it shifts color in to the gamut of the printer or workspace.

Point is what for me would work is a graphic image colorspace resemblence which is overlayed a working space. (This way you can see how much is out of gamut in a model.
(i can’t find the post i think Sankos did explain it here
(i wanted to show those mac colorspace check as example. if you have a image’s colorgraphic as overley on this you can see where it sticks out the gamut of for example AdobeRGB. And see which colors are need to be compressed in order to fit.
this is easier to grasp then the “out of gamut blinkies colors”

you may check to visualize different colour spaces in windows.

1 Like

Here is a very interesting article about using AdobeRGB vs sRGB: sRGB vs. Adobe RGB

Ken Rockwell knows what he is talking about and of he appears to just use sRGB for everything. Keep things simple and leave colour spaces at their default and just concentrate on your photos.

I never change colour spaces and have never had an issue with output to standard quick print labs all the way to colour accurate professional printing for my book where my fish pictures need to be colour accurate. This all using sRGB!

I have my camera set for AdobeRGB, so the ooc jpegs have largest colorspace it can have.
My export is sRGB because 99% is for screen viewing.
The only hairy thing is, editingscreen not 100% AdobeRGB capable. So i could have some blind pieces in the colors

Keep in mind he is also talking about colors on different output devices and that article is from 2006. Things have changed since then.


As often Ken Rockwell simplifies a lot – but yes, for web representation, standard printing, ordering photo books and such – better to use sRGB, but also avoid wide gamut monitors.
→ scenario D
Here’s another link with some test images. It shows how your internet browser deals with different color spaces. It’s a series of articles, also from 2006 :slightly_smiling_face:


1 Like

On this page one also gets instructions how to setup an internet browser (just disregard advertisments).