Re: ICC profiles and digi-cam

Lee Varis

Bob Smith wrote:

...Mike makes the case that building a profile
based on a simple RGB space definition (like a custom RGB working space) is
going to be better suited for using the camera under a broad range of
conditions than a profile based on LUTs as most input profiles are. With
the D1, I believe that what Mike has done is simply come up with a custom
working space that more closely fits the D1's usual RGB than any of the
built in spaces in Photoshop. Files are then moved from that space to a
more normal space upon opening in Photoshop. Comments?
I definitely think this is the way to go. In fact, I use something very
similar - I use a workspace that is basically ColorMatch with a gamma of
2.2, 5500k white - it's a real plain Jane monitor type of space that I
can convert out of pretty easily and it seems to work well for the
digital camera files that I use.

As far as Adobe 1998 goes, sometimes it its worth assigning for creative
effect. If the image has a fair amount of red tones in it I find that
they tend to render over saturated and kind of orange but certain images
perk up quite nicely. The advantage of "assigning" a different profile
is that you can get a different color rendering without pushing the data
in the file. Try "assigning" wide gamut RGB to an image with very
pastel, muted tones - it's surprising how much color you can extract
from an image this way - convert to your output and fine tune.

I think one can get too fixated on "correct", or "true", whatever that
is. What clients really want is an image that "looks" better than
reality. Jeff Schewe often says that the reason Photoshop exists is that
"reality sucks". Using simple work space profiles gets you into a good
position from which you can "depart" from reality.

You still might need a custom LUT based input profile if you are trying
to really accurately track colors for some scientific reason.


Lee Varis

Join to automatically receive all group messages.