First off, the images should look virtually identical in any working space in an ICC aware application. The numbers of course or different. You can duplicate a document in ProPhoto RGB, covert it in Photoshop to sRGB, Adobe RGB etc, they will appear the same. So if that's not happening, something is setup wrong. Outside ICC aware applications, the RGB numbers simply get sent to the display without the application having a clue about the display profile or the color space of the document.
Well, I think that is where Mlmcasual's suggestions come into play. My OS may not be locking into the custom ICC profile of my new 2690xi2, so I would be willing to bet that, once I try his suggestions my problem will be solved, because (at this point) there remains a noticeable difference between files. I don't know anything about Firefox, but I guess I will have a crash course lesson in it today
It depends on your workflow. Everything I deal with starts as Raw so I process into ProPhoto RGB 16-bit because I don't want to clip colors that might be in the scene that the camera could capture which has a greater gamut then Adobe RGB could contain. Plus ACR and LR use ProPhoto RGB (linear gamma) for all processing so why funnel that data into a smaller color space. In Lightroom, if I want to go to the web, I can export the data in sRGB. But for working on a master image in Photoshop, one that will now on be edited in Photoshop, I stick with ProPhoto RGB in 16-bit from now on. Once in Photoshop, that master can spawn an iteration that's smaller, cropped, and placed into a different color space. But the hero master document is always in ProPhoto RGB.
Okay, so I pretty much was thinking on the right track, thanks to reading your documents. I just need to solve the problem of consistency (per Mlmcasual), and then I need to get in the habit of working with my master documents in ProPhotoRGB, from which I may make various "save as" assignments to sRGB as needed. (Although, perhaps it would be best to start over again from scratch, in sRGB, for web-intended images?)
If I am also understanding you right, once I get my OS to recognize my new monitor, I really don't need to stop using Adobe Photoshop 7.0.1 either. It seems what I need is to really become proficient in Photoshop, but perhaps get Lightroom to do most of my work there.
Again, you simply can't send a ProPhoto RGB image to a web page because nearly all web browsers are not ICC aware and as you've seen, they look awful. You need to build an iteration in sRGB for the web. And keep in mind that even in sRGB, in a non ICC aware web browser, the image will not match exactly what you saw in Photoshop unless you're real lucky and no other users on other machines will see the same RGB numbers preview identically.
Hmmm. It would seem, therefore, that if I took a particular photo that I liked a lot, and wanted to place a version of it on the web, that it would make sense to build from the original RAW file twice. I would work on it in ProPhotoRGB for printing purposes; and I would begin all over again in sRGB for web publication purposes. It occurs to me that my chances for getting unwanted hues, etc. by converting from ProPhotoRGB to sRGB would be great, when viewed through non-ICC browsers, but that if I started to work on an image intended for web purposes in sRGB direct from the original RAW file
, that I would ultimately be better off.
You've got data that is going to have a wider and narrower gamut then that display. If its wider, there will be very saturated colors you can't see. So the option is, throw away those colors that you could use for output or keep them and see them on output but not on the display. If you look at gamut maps of modern ink jets, especially the new HDR inks from Epson, you can see there's a great deal of colors outside the gamut of Adobe RGB (1998). I'd rather see those colors used in my print then toss them away because they exceed the gamut of my display. Unless you're only outputting to the web, I don't think it pays to throw away colors that the capture device and output device can use despite the gamut of the display.
That harkens back to Wayne's concurrent advice, where he mentioned how very often his finished prints come out even nicer than what he can see on his monitor screen ...
There will never be a display that produces ProPhoto RGB. I say never with confidence because ProPhoto RGB is such a large gamut space, it extends some "colors*" outside of human vision (gamut). *Technically, if you can't see it, its not a color, but you get my drift.
That's where for me, Lightroom comes into play. But yes, you want various iterations from the hero master based on your needs for size, output, etc.
Okay, then I believe y'all have pointed me on the right track. Thank you!
I do actually keep three folders for each set of images - the raw, a ProPhoto version, and only for those I intend to post to the internet, I create JPEGs and save those in a separate folder.
Exactly. That is the first thing that popped into my head as I read Andrew's article, was that "I am going to need to make different folders for different my image types."
That said, regardless of what your display shows, it is best to do all your editing in 16-bit ProPhoto, because once you shrink to ARGB98, save and quit, unless you go back to the raw file you've lost the wider gamut. THEN, for those images which you intend to post to the internet, you convert them to sRGB with Black Point Compensation. Having done that, you then convert the image to 8 bit, resize it to the dimensions (e.g. maximum 8 inches on either dimension) and PPI you want (best to stay in the range of 72~96 PPI for the web) and do a SAVE AS into JPEG format with a low enough compression (high enough quality setting - I use 10) to preserve adequate quality without too large file size. Then you examine what you have and make any tweaks you think the image may need, save it again, and you have your web-ready JPEG, without losing any of the gamut or bit depth of the original processed image. I've created a Photoshop Action for this set of steps.
Okay, thanks. I was thinking that I might just start from scratch all over again, from RAW, working in sRGB, for images intended for the web. What you're saying is that if I follow the above method, and convert from ProPhotoRGB to sRGB that I will not get unwanted hues ... that can't be seen in my program ... but that will be seen through a web browser ...
You can also make web-ready images directly in Lightroom from the raw files if you've had no reason to export them to Photoshop for any processing steps you needed and are not available in LR. Photoshop also has a "Save for Web and Devices" algorythm, but it won't work from a ProPhto 16-bit image - it doesn't expect such large files as a starting point.
Exactly. That was why I was kinda thinking I should just get used to the idea of developing each RAW image from scratch twice
: one in ProPhotoRGB for printing purposes, the other in sRGB for web-publishing purposes.
BTW: Again, I truly appreciate everyone's input, thank you!