Request/Suggestion: Fix to avoid being caught-out if NOT using Soft Proofing (with new Working Color Space)

Dear John,

Screens are at least sRGB capable but they are not sRGB. Screens have their own color profile. Apple screens profiles are different from Samsung screens profiles (i.e. color spaces are different even if sRGB capable). What you see in your screen with Photolab 6 and Wide Gamut selected, is the conversion of Wide Gamut in the screen color space, not in sRGB color space.

Therefore, if you export an image to sRGB color space and want to see what will be your image after export, you have to make a soft proofing, Wide Gamut to sRGB, exactly as you would do for printing, Wide Gamut to printer color profile.

Photolab 5 is WYS|WYG for one simple reason :

If in your camera you select Adobe 1998 for your photographies, working color space in Photolab 5 is Adobe 1998. If in your camera you select sRGB for your photographies, working color space in Photolab 5 is sRGB.

Then, if in the export options you keep for export, the original color space selected in your camera, Adobe to Adobe, sRGB to sRGB, that means that you do not change of color space and therefore, no soft proofing is necessary: WYS/WYG.

If you export an image from Adobe 1998 to sRGB as far as the difference of size between these two color spaces is not huge you will not see a big differences… if any.


This is not true. PhotoLab 5 has a working (internal) color space of Adobe RGB, always, and RAW files have no defined color space - the gamut is that of the camera sensor. It’s too easy to confuse what is meant by a working color space.


A very active debate, but sadly missing the DXO team. And they should be most interested in him. Not a good sign…

1 Like

There has been a noticeable absence of nearly all those who responded to these posts to anything since the new version


As you can read here, we need answers and information, and would be happy if someone from the Dxo team would join us here again.

Thank you very much and have a nice weekend


I got this information directly from DxO support years ago when I wondered what was the working color space of DxO Optics Pro (I started using DxO soft with DxO Optics Pro 7 in 2008, Photolab being only a renaming of Optics Pro). But maybe I got a wrong information; it is possible. We never know…

Kind Regards

For recent confirmation by DxO of what I said:

1 Like

It seems you misinterpreted the info you received, Paule - - PL’s Classic Working Color Space indeed is Adobe-RGB … but that does not have the implications that you suppose it does.

The 3rd link provided by Egregious/Greg (listed just above) directly addresses this point.

… and you are capturing RAW files ONLY, then it makes no difference (as explained in the 3rd link above) … BUT, if you’re capturing RAWs & JPGs then your camera will write to JPGs for the Adobe-RGB color-space … which may not look “right” when viewed on a non-capable monitor.

John M

1 Like

That doesn’t mean the issue has been addressed in the update, John (if that is what you were wondering).

Personally, I’ve said all I can for now (other than providing clarifications, as necessary) - and am now waiting, expectantly, to see how DxO will address it.

John M

1 Like

I fully agree and have suggested, during testing, a processing flow diagram be provided by DxO. I don’t think that would reveal any trade secrets.

1 Like

For those who are struggling with the topic of Colour Management and Soft Proofing, I found this article that does a really good job of explaining the workflow of RAW processing in a colour managed environment. There is a very good flowchart too.

Hope it helps!



Irrelevant for rawfiles.

So as big as AdobeRGB but slightly tilted to the right.

Yes intil every device is updated to Display P3 colorspace capable…:yum:

Is like putting a small box with inside your item in to a larger one and send that to the shop.

1 Like

That will only help you if you are using the new WGCS.

Well, it didn’t do any harm with the old AdobeRGB workflow in PL5.

said otherwise: there is no point in exporting an image coded in a restricted space (srgb/adobe rgb) to a larger space, so much to continue in adobe rgb
on the other hand, processing an image in a wide space (dxo wide gamut) allows much more “fine” calculations on the shades of colors and there is an interest in exporting to prophoto rgb to preserve these shades (and the saturated colors which are outside of adob or srgb) so that the printer’s printing software converts the space of the photo (prophoto) as late as possible to the smaller profile of the printer (ink - paper couple) there will gain on some rare photos in shades or saturation.
for photos that are not very saturated at the base (portraits/other…) whose colors fall into srgb, of course, nothing will be gained.
who can do more can do less.

therefore working with software whose workspace is “wide” leaves more possibilities even if in practice few photos will benefit from it

1 Like

From What’s new? - DxO

Enjoy more accurate and lifelike photos with PhotoLab 6’s new wide gamut color space.

Far exceeding Adobe RGB, it uses spectral primary colors for natural, vibrant results, particularly in highly saturated images.

The upgrade means you can boost colors while avoiding clipping in saturated regions. Plus, the new color space also means the ClearView Plus tool can achieve even better results as it has more colors to work with.

As a result, DxO PhotoLab 6 is also a perfect fit with the latest generation of wide-gamut monitors.

So, if you don’t need those benefits, stick with the older WCS or with PL5. But I like what the new WCS makes possible - and that acknowledges why customers have been asking for a wide-gamut WCS for years. So far, I’ve seen some better renderings using it even though I only output in sRGB (screen and JPEG). I haven’t decided what settings to use when exporting to TIFF: so far, I use “As Shot” which goes to sRGB, probably because that’s what I set in the camera for JPEG output. I don’t think it will be worthwhile for me to export to a wider gamut unless I actually start using a wider gamut for output I can see (screen, printing, etc). On that note, I personally wouldn’t use ProPhoto unless I wanted to work on the TIFF image further in a program that could use such a wide gamut as a WCS. Its gamut exceeds what’s visible, leading to a real risk of clipping otherwise. But FWIW, the DxO Wide Gamut WCS ensures that an export to ProPhoto stays within the visible range.


Thank you.
I hope a lot of the posters read up on how color management actually work. It would give a healthy insight. :slight_smile:

1 Like

No, but as @OXiDant says, you are putting your lower gamut file in a much higher gamut colour space for NO benefit. With the WGCS in PL6 you may now get some benefit.

In the past you MAY have lost some colour without even knowing it when using the Classic Colour Space.

Which brings me to the question:

What is the correct colours for a photo? To me it is what I remember (very subjective) and what I like when I edit which is also very subjective. Is it an exact representation of the scene you photographed? I doubt it as everyone has their own interpretation.

Everyone is trying to get the perfect colours from this new colour space and soft proofing functionality rather than thinking: I can get more saturated colours but need to be more careful because it can modify the look of my photo when publishing (printing or displaying on the web etc.)


Here’s a reliable source; StevenL is a DxO staff member;

John M

1 Like

Here’s another attempt at explaining the reason and purpose for this request/suggestion.

The following screen-shots are from here … DxO’s support pages.

… Because;

I explained (above) this “automatically applied protection” as occurring in two cases;



That last point is VERY good advice … Otherwise, your “exported images {may} look different compared to what is seen on-screen while editing”.

To restate: The purpose of my Request/Suggestion is to ensure that PLv6 always behaves so that naïve, unsuspecting users are NOT caught out by this (effectively) hidden algorithm.

  • Note: I am not arguing against this Protect Saturated Colors algorithm (it’s a very-good-thing) - but, the subsequent behaviour of PLv6 would be greatly improved with this proposed solution.

  • Tip: Meanwhile, my personal work-around is to have SP=ON at all times (tho, YMMV).

John M

1 Like