Epson 4900: Prophoto/aRGB, 16/8 bit

[walter.sk]

I used to send images to my Z3100 in Prophoto space, 16 bit depth.  I have been doing the same with the Epson 4900 until I carefully read the Readme file that came along with my Ilford-made profile for Galerie Smooth Pearl.  It suggested aRGB, so I assume that's what their profile was made with, and I also assumed 8 bit color depth.  I converted my file to aRGB and 8 bits, and the prints came out fine.

Question #5493 so far:  (I hate the new learning curve.)  If I use Epson's papers and profiles, is there any advantage or harm if I continue to send 16-bit ProPhoto files to the printer?  If I make my own profiles with the Munki, should they be made in aRGB or can I use ProPhoto? And should I use 8 or 16 bit color?

I am getting closer to understanding the printer, though.  I might even accomplish that before the next model comes out...

[Farmer]

It doesn't matter, mostly.

I would suggest leaving them in the larger working space (pro photo), as the printer does have some gamut outside of Adobe RGB (1998).  Photoshop deals with mapping colour from your working space to the printer space - there's no need for you to send it in one or the other.  The only time that becomes beneficial is if you're not using a colour managed workflow and instead you are using the driver to control your colour.  In that case, the driver typically has different options, some of which will expected Adobe RGB (1998) and some sRGB - sometimes they're labelled in a way that helps, other times they're not (and if not, I'd suggest they are looking for sRGB only).

But, as I said, with a colour managed profile using ICC profiles and with PS managing the colour, it doesn't matter except that if you use a space that is smaller than the printer's then you risk missing out on some of the printer's gamut.

[Schewe]

But, as I said, with a colour managed profile using ICC profiles and with PS managing the colour, it doesn't matter except that if you use a space that is smaller than the printer's then you risk missing out on some of the printer's gamut.

If you look at the gamut of the 4900 and Adobe RGB you'll see there are colors the printer can print that are outside of the gamut of Adobe RGB...so working in ARGB will limit those colors.

If you have already come to grips working in ProPhoto RGB and 16 bits, it would really be a shame to drop to 8 bit and Adobe RGB for the print. Would you see a difference? I don't know about you, but I could.

I think Ilford is wrong...

[Wayne Fox]

It suggested aRGB, so I assume that's what their profile was made with, and I also assumed 8 bit color depth. 

Profiles are not made with a color space ... would be pointless to do so. You send the target data to the printer unmanaged. The idea of a profile is to characterize a printer so you can convert the image data into the devices space.

As has been mentioned, if you clip your image data into the aRGB space, you will be giving up color information that your printer is capable of printing because it has a larger gamut than aRGB.

It's unclear why Ilford would be giving such advice because it really doesn't matter to the printer what the image space is. If you clip the image data into sRGB or aRGB, it will still look "fine", but it doesn't make sense to buy such a fine printer with such a terrific gamut, and just throw those colors away.

[walter.sk]

Thanks to all for your responses.  I'm glad the consensus appears to use ProPhoto and 16 bit, same as I did with my Z3100.  I haaven't seen any problems with sending those files to the 4900, either.  I much prefer working in ProPhoto and 16bits.