Re: color gamut -- er, working space

On Jul 20, 2004, at 10:25 PM, Judy Seigel wrote:

Thanks so much to Jack, Mark & Eric for the info. It's a huge relief to
learn that the problem is probably fixable, and I am again in awe of
list knowledge. I'll try to do exactly what Jack says (when I can
figure it out.... Sigh....very humbling).

Mark is right about the thing being "space", not gamut. The message
said:

The document... has an embedded color profile that does not match the
current RGB working space. The current RGB color management policy is
to discard profiles that do not match the working space.

Embedded: sRGBIEC61966-2.1 [if I have read my handwriting correctly]

Working: Adobe RGB (1998)

================

Should I take that to mean the camera color is set to 1966????
Nope . . . there have been 'standards' put forth by different groups at
various times. One of these 'standards' is sRGB which was designed
primarily as a color space for Windows users. If the scanner, camera,
printer etc. all fall in this sRGB space one can achieve, as Garrison
Keiler might say, "pretty good color most of the time." It is kind of a
generic way to obtain and maintain color accuracy and rendering through
the cycle of image creation and final output. you'll be about 80%
accurate.

For the serious person involved with Color Management it is not enough.
However, there is a controversy raging over sRGB. Apple says sRGB space
and a 1.8 gamma is the way virtually all the world's computers and
instruments see color. This complies with the Windows idea but the
gamma for Windows is 2.2 therefore making an Apple file translated to a
Windows environment look a bit darker.

If one works w/the Macintosh computer you'll need to download specific
sRGB profiles for the camera, scanner, printer etc.

Again, for the person fully interested in WYSIWYG you'll need to have:
        1. a good quality and 'fresh' (under 3 years old) monitor w/adjustable
RGB guns
        2. monitor calibration soft and hardware to create ICC profiles
        3. a) a good RIP such as ImagePrint
                b) software and a spectrophotometer to create your own profiles
                c) or, well made profiles such as those created by Bill Atkinson for
the Epson UC ink set.

Basically, rather than working with sRBG you'll be in color space such
as Adobe RGB 1968 or ColorMatch or Ektaspace (by Joe Holmes) etc. and
you'll be concerned with ICC profiles.
ICC stands for International Color Consortium, founded in the early
1930's to establish an agreed upon standardization of color profiles
across platforms. It allows one to move from one platform and in one
color space to another space and platform via 'translation' of these
profiles.

The normal person simply does not need this complication in their life.

Mark, I understand you to say that I could change the camera color to
the 1998 RGB, so that when you say "read the manual," you mean read
the camera manual... Neither "color" nor "profile" are in the index.
What should I look for?

Eric, I'm not using "raw" -- would I still want the raw plug-in?
If you do not use RAW files you do not require the Adobe plug-in. RAW
files greatly increase storage problems but one does obtain the pure
form of the digital image as rendered by the camera's chip. Much
manipulation of density, saturation, tint, color temperature, smoothing
of colors, size of image and bits can be set when opening a RAW file.
Frankly, the normal person . . including most of us . . cannot see much
difference by using the JPEG files a digital camera can produce.
RAW is for an individual fully into color management more-so than a
mere aficionado do even dilettante.

And I am using Mac OS 9.2. (Even saying the word "Ten" in G-4's space
causes all systems to crash).
A G4 can nicely run Panther 10.3.4 if, when installing, one does not
include all the various languages and printer drivers, particularly the
GIMP/Cups driver. But, there is definitely a learning curve that's a
pain in the patootey.
Received on Wed Jul 21 12:24:29 2004