It is CS4 or me ? sRGB from D80 frowned upon

Discussion in 'Photoshop' started by Ticonderoga, Nov 20, 2008.

  1. Ticonderoga

    Ticonderoga Guest

    I am evaluating CS4 downloaded from Adobe and have met a problem.

    I am using .NEF files made with a Nikon D80. The camera is set to sRGB.

    If I open this file with CS3, ARC (4.6) will open stating at the bottom of
    the screen (rightly) that the image is indeed sRGB.

    Opening it in CS4 will open ARC (5.1) and at the bottom of the screen the
    image is tagged as AdobeRGB, which is wrong.

    Not only, but opening the image in Bridge CS4 the small pane with the
    color space shows a different opinion and says that the image is untagged.

    This is pretty annoying. Anybody else have met this problem or know
    something about it I don't ?

    Ticonderoga, Nov 20, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  2. Ticonderoga

    Joel Guest

    It sounds like CS4 isn't for you. For most of Photoshop users, we pay for
    it so we have our choice to set to whatever colorspace we wish.

    If your Nikon sets to sRGB then it's fine right there as you have the
    option to set to whatever you wish, and sRGB is your choice

    Now, we are talking about Photoshop which ain't Nikon, Photoshop is a
    photo retoucher and if you want to set to sRGB then tell it to use sRGB,
    else like many of us we use aRGB so we tell it to use aRGB.
    Joel, Nov 21, 2008
    1. Advertisements

  3. Ticonderoga

    KatWoman Guest

    100% wrong answer from JOEL grumpy gramps
    once again

    he also thinks all jobs are retouch only with masks
    I advise not listening to any advice he gives EVER

    in the ARC converter dialog at bottom it shows a color space as Johan
    answered correctly
    you can change to your color space of choice in there

    if you shot srgb and want to keep srgb choose it and it will continue to
    default to that every time

    there is a handy option there to change sizes as well, good for saving quick
    copy of a file for web
    KatWoman, Nov 21, 2008
  4. Ticonderoga

    Dave Guest

    With reference to your last sentence, I am using a 9MP camera.
    (Fuji Finepix S9600)
    The default in ACR Preferences is 3488 by 2616 (9.1 MP) with
    alternatives of reducing it to 1.4 MP or enlarging it up to 28.3 MP -
    6144 by 4608 (28.3MP)+.
    Of course I do not question reducing the sizes but how come do I have
    the options of enlarging sizes 300%? What would the quality
    (difference) be if I would make use of it?
    Is it worth a try?
    Dave, Nov 22, 2008
  5. Ticonderoga

    Jurgen Guest

    Not just worth a try Dave, it is used very regularly by those who make
    prints from RAW files and now (since ACR began supporting JPEG) from
    most files.

    Pedantic people who use a 10x loupe to view their prints might find
    Genuine Fractals a little better at enlargements but for the rest of
    us, doubling the size of an image during development with ACR is no big
    deal and quite workable.
    Jurgen, Nov 22, 2008
  6. Ticonderoga

    Dave Guest

    Thanks for the info, Jurgen. I used Genuine Fractals time(s) ago
    but *if there's so little differences, this is the way to go.
    Only now as Johan as KatWoman pointed to the preferences,
    I had a look at it and the question came to mind.
    Another reason thus for shooting RAW is for the sake of enlargements.
    Dave, Nov 22, 2008
  7. Ticonderoga

    Jurgen Guest

    Dave, shooting in RAW mode gets rid of the artefacts from camera
    generated jpeg images. To get your head around the issues of whether or
    not to use RAW. The use of your output needs to be assessed.

    I use Fujifilm s5 cameras in jpeg mode as my camera of choice at events
    and for 60% of wedding work. They produce reasonably clean jpegs with
    artefacts that don't show up until you go seriously big with your
    prints. I never shoot anything larger than prints for a 12"x16" album
    with them.

    When I take mission critical shots (portraits) I use a Nikon D300 - an
    almost identical camera with a single rather than a dual sensor in it. I
    wouldn't dream of shooting anything with a D300 that wasn't shot RAW
    because I almost always need to expand the dynamic range of that camera
    in post processing. The s5s do it via a dual sensors but at the price of
    using interpolation to get the advertised image resolution.

    After seeing how good double sized images are from the camera, I tried
    it with ACR and found the D300 produced crisper 20 megapixel images than
    the 10 megapixel ones from the Fuji.

    I imagine one day a camera will be developed with the dynamic range of
    the dual sensor Fuji and the image quality of the D300. Don't let my
    pedantic assessment as a perfectionist cloud your judgement. If I can't
    make a life size portrait from an image, I'm not happy with it!
    Jurgen, Nov 22, 2008
  8. Ticonderoga

    KatWoman Guest

    the situation did not come up for me Dave but it is good to know one more
    advantage to RAW ACR processing

    now you taught me
    I learned a lot from NG participation over the time we spent

    I have had an image enlarged by Genuine Fractals to make a large portrait
    but the image was made to a graphic not exactly a photo anymore
    so as for detail clarity grain I could not say how much it was helpful
    KatWoman, Nov 22, 2008
  9. Ticonderoga

    Dave Guest

    Totally agree Jurgen. RAW is what I shoot when I want to save it as
    Tiff or when upsizing is needed. Upsizing which up to now, was done
    in Tiff.

    This discussion had me browsing the Internet and I came to a link
    which will be found very interesting not only by you, but also by
    every serious photographer in this NG.[email protected]@.3bbd164e.59b678a3/9
    Dave, Nov 22, 2008
  10. Ticonderoga

    Ticonderoga Guest

    Thank you
    Ticonderoga, Nov 22, 2008
  11. Ticonderoga

    Joel Guest

    If you have known and tried the Enlargement feature of CS2 or newer then
    you may find it works quite well. I only use it on low-rez I download from
    internet to use as DVD Label, and I have never use Genuine Fractals to be
    able to tell the difference, but I read the built-in has some
    advantage/disadvantage comparing to Genuine Fractals. And to me, if someone
    has to spend time to compare the small differences then I guess they are
    pretty close to each other.

    And from few articles and samples I read, the Photoshop's built-in feature
    is even better than Genuine Fractals.
    Joel, Nov 23, 2008
  12. Ticonderoga

    Dave Guest

    Very true, Joel. The difference seem to be minimal.
    The truth in what you are saying get displayed here.
    This is not a comparison with Genuine Fractals but the comparison is
    between Photoshops facility and RAW's facility. According to
    Matt Kloskowski, there is no difference at all.
    Some people do the editing before the enlargement
    and others do it afterwards. Some do sharpening before
    and others say it must be done afterwards. And like Jurgen said,
    a 10X loupe is needed to notice the difference.

    Upsizing Your Photos
    Last updated Aug 8, 2008.

    There's lots of different ways to take an existing image and make it
    larger. Some say that it's best to do it in Photoshop using Image
    Size. Others say it's best to do it on the raw file in Adobe Camera
    Raw. In this week's video, we're going to take a look at the two and
    compare the differences of resizing side by side.

    Upsizing Your Photos: Video Tutorial
    Dave, Nov 23, 2008
  13. Ticonderoga

    Rob Guest

    Rob, Nov 23, 2008
  14. Ticonderoga

    KatWoman Guest

    glad to help
    KatWoman, Nov 23, 2008
  15. Ticonderoga

    Joel Guest

    That's pretty much the general basic commands of what most RAW converters
    do. And I don't go through all the showing off teaching style process but
    few basic adjusting, then send to Photoshop to finish the job.

    And I am more familar with ARC than LightRoom which I like little less
    than ARC cuz of the slow displaying comparing to ARC.
    Joel, Nov 23, 2008
  16. Ticonderoga

    Dave Guest

    I taught you!? What a compliment:)
    Exactly so KatWoman, NG participation can be wonderful uplifting.
    I have learned more from this NG than anywhere else.
    Often the atmosphere in news groups get a gaussian blur but afterwards
    it get smart sharpened again.
    This keep on being a question which way to go. Yesterday I have seen
    two videos done by Matt Kloskowski, proving there is absolute no
    difference between enlarging in ACR or by using Photoshop's
    enlargement facility. His workflow is 'while you are in ACR, do it
    there. If not, do it in Photoshop.
    Dave, Nov 24, 2008
  17. Ticonderoga

    Dave Guest

    Dave, Nov 24, 2008
  18. Ticonderoga

    Jurgen Guest

    I used to think Genuine Fractals was the "ONLY", fantastic enlargement
    medium. I used to enlarge D60 Canon and later 10D images to poster size
    prints with it.

    As Photoshop evolved and developed neater components, GF got
    disappointingly little development and eventually fell behind the
    program it needed for what it did.

    There is a double edged penalty in following the advise of some PS gurus
    to make enlargements. For starters doing the enlargement in ACR results
    in a monster file that is power hungry to edit.

    It would be good if you could edit a small file and save the
    intermediate work as a DNG file then open it in ACR to enlarge it but
    ACR won't open a 32 bit tiff!

    I guess this is what keeps Adobe in cash. New versions that have much
    wanted features while not having others! God luv 'em!
    Jurgen, Nov 25, 2008
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.