1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

Once again: RGB or sRGB ?

Discussion in 'Macro, Flowers, Insects, and Greenery' started by JPS, Jun 8, 2005.

  1. RGB

  2. sRGB

    0 vote(s)
  1. Here's two buds (are they ?) that i shot today... Reduced for Web use (900x615 pixels), they are about 10:1 of the original...
    Both were taken with Fuji S2 Pro and Tamron SP90 - 1:125 @ f/32 with two flashes

    #1 has been saved in RGB mode
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    #2 has been saved in sRGB mode
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    #3 has been saved in RGB mode
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    #4 has been saved in sRGB mode
    Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)

    For me, there is a neat difference ! The sRGB ones are -on my screen- more contrasted and "colored"... i would say too much in fact, as compared to the original flower !
    Thing is, it seems that it can look quite different on your screen, depending how your system has been set... I'd be interested to know wich one is prefered by the majority here !
  2. Jean-Pierre on my screen the sRGB have more saturated color than the RGB, my screen is a Viewsonic VG800.
  3. Jerry Snider

    Jerry Snider

    May 8, 2005
    The sRGB has more punch colorwise on both of my screens. (LaCie blue IV CRT; Dell CRT). I don't feel that they are overly so, at least on my screens. The RGB photos look a bit drab in comparison. These both are fully opened flowers (the bottom one is called an inflorescence, i.e. an entire group of flowers, male flowers on the lower portion of the stalk, female flowers on the upper portion of the stalk), although I have no idea as to what they might be.
    Jerry Snider
  4. Gale


    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    I like the srgb better. rgb looks dull.. i voted srgb
  5. I could be complete wrong here, but the difference you are seeing here is not because of sRGB vs. RGB, but rather how the image are rendered due to the capability of the viewing browser.

    The main thing to consider when saving to sRGB or RGB is the intended device for the presentation, in this case the computer monitor. Because sRGB is the most likely and commonly supported colour space used by browsers today, it make sense to save the image in sRGB format.

    When editing the image using your favourite software (Photoshop say), and provided you have your colour profile installed and monitor calibrated, what you see is really what you want the image to be on screen. If the original image is in AdobeRGB (e.g. mode II for D70), Photoshop actually translates this into sRGB when rendered on the monitor, so that you are seeing the intended result when adjusting.

    When you save your edited images, you then have a choice of saving into any other colour space that is available to the software, including RGB and sRGB, and other printer specific colour spaces. This is done so that the final output will be rendered the same as what you see on your monitor (when you are doing your adjustment). This is particularly important when sending the output to a printer that is not colour space aware, i.e. will not convert the colour space to its own colour space to preserve the intended "result", in such cases you will need to save to the colour space specific to the printer. Otherwise you will get really off colour prints that bear no resemblance to what you saw on the computer monitor.

    If the two images above have the colour profile embedded in the jpeg file, then by using a image viewer that is colour space aware, they will look exactly the same when rendered on the monitor. They look different in the browser because most browsers do not take into account when rendering an image, i.e. there is no translation of the colour space. The sRGB version of the image will be the more accurate (as you intended), since most browsers will only render in sRGB.

    Some information of the sRGB and AdobeRGB 1998 here:

  6. Hi Jonathan (and others too) !

    I agree with you, but, from the majority of the answers, it seems that everybody "sees" the same difference between the RGB and sRGB pics as i do... For me, it proves that if i want the majority of people to see my pics the way i want -and showing the most accurate colors-, i have to keep saving them in RGB, even if they look "flat" when compared to the sRGB... in real life, they ARE softer than what the sRGB tend to show !

    Of course, there's another problem: do we want to show THE TRUTH or do we want to do something more "artsy" ? ...and that's up to each one to decide: i choose to show things as much as possible as they really are, else, i explain in the post that i enhanced/changed such and such thing, and why...

    Thanks all for the votes and the posts...
  7. Exactly. What I am trying to say is that you only need to save in sRGB for web publishing, as this will present to the viewer exactly what you intend them to see, with the softer colour, etc. i.e. preserve the colour as you see them in Photoshop when you are making the adjustment. Saving in RGB actually works in the reverse direction, the viewer will most likely not see what you intended as the colour space is mis-presented by the browser.

    BTW, these are great macros!

  8. MontyDog


    Jan 30, 2005
    #1064 - You have an error in your SQL syntax;
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.