|
Inside This Issue |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| sRGB vs Adobe RGB: The Truth Continued | |
| Let’s try them both and see how they fit... Here’s the photo enclosed inside the Adobe RGB color space container. All the data fits inside just fine. | Ok, well let’s try the sRGB space. Fits just fine in this one too. |
 The example portrait pixel data inside the AdobeRGB "container". |
The same example portrait pixel data |
| Hmmm, what’s the difference. Let’s see. The Adobe RGB space is the same height as sRGB, but it is considerably wider and holds more volume of color, much more in fact. So if you had a camera or scanner that could capture more color info than this portrait example image, you might just need the added space that the Adobe RGB space can provide for you. In fact, our high end scanner in the Crockett Studios can gather so much color info that the Adobe space is too small, so we use one even bigger to hold the data. Remember - use the right tool for the job. | |
|
What about sending files to a lab for printing, is sRGB or Adobe RGB better? |
|
| What about sending
files to a lab for printing, is sRGB or Adobe RGB better? Both can be fine. Commercial photo labs can take data in any space you throw at them, but portrait labs like Nulab, are very specific on how the data is to be sent in for proper printing. Let’s take a look at two facts regarding digital workflow: |
|
|
FACT ONE: there are no printers with a color space (aka output space) that is larger (holding more volume of data) than sRGB. |
|
| Take a look here, this is the
Adobe RGB color space with my Epson 2200 color space nestled inside...
The Adobe RGB space is much larger than my Epson 2200's output space. |
...and here’s sRGB with my
Pictrography 4500 space placed inside.
The sRGB space is much larger than my Pictrography 4500's output space. |
