FWIW I print at home, but I do all my editing with softproof for the paper/printer combination. So that I do not end up re-editing the images I want. I do not think that you need to keep switching back and forth with all the. If you editing an image for the web why would you want to edit the thing with aRGB. I am of the opinion that you should edit for final output... If your final output can only handle sRGB then edit in sRGB. Just my .02
Not looking to profile for web publishing but to obtain prints from an online printshop (pictopia, mpix, shutterfly, kodak, etc.). I have the Pictopia and mPix ICC profiles for their paper/printer combos (Pictopia accepts files tagged with their ICC, while mPix requires sRGB).
My workflow starts out in a wide gamut space such as proRGB in order to allow the most editing headroom and finishes with a conversion to a or sRGB, depending on the printer's requirements (Pictopia accepts aRGB if you don't want to use their ICC profile).
On occasion the prints I recieved did not comport with expectations. As such, I started softproofing with the printer's ICC profiles to see what gamut issues I was running into.
Just can't understand why there is such a dramatic onscreen difference between softproofing with a printer's ICC profile vs. actually converting to that exact same profile.