Change Aperture previews color space from Adobe98 to sRgb

Hi,
I'd like to change the default color space for the jpg previews that Aperture generates from the masters of my library.
I now have all my jpegs saved as Adobe98 but it's important for me to have them saved as sRGB because when third party apps and devices go to read them, they can't reproduce the right colors if they find the wrong color profile.
Thanks in advance for your help!

I don't know how many different ways to say that you cannot change the color space for previews. The files themselves have specific image data that corresponds to a specific color profile that is Adobe 1998 you cannot change the way Aperture generates these. Changing your system has nothing to do with it.
As for work-flow - If you need this to work and it doesn't then it never has so I really don't see how it is changing your work-flow that never existed?
RB
Ps. External devices like projectors work fine as long as your presentation software respects the source profile and has an output device profile - what kind of "device" are you using?
Message was edited by: rwboyer

Similar Messages

AdobeRGB color space from camera

My camera (Canon EOS Rebel XTi/400D) can be set to a Color Space that is either sRGB (the default) or AdobeRGB. As an experiment, I set it to AdobeRGB and processed a few photos (both JPGs and RAWs) through PSE5, which came out fine.
However, I noticed that the metadata for those photos shows "Untagged RGB" instead of AdobeRGB. This doesn't matter in my normal workflow, since I have set PSE5 to import untagged photos as AdobeRGB. But it might mess up other workflows.
I wonder if it is considered normal behavior for a camera to produce AdobeRGB photos that are not tagged as such, or if it is a peculiarity of this particular brand or model.
(It also occurred to me later that the color space tag set by the camera only matters when shooting JPG, not when shooting RAW. The Camera RAW converter always converts to the color space that I have set PSE5 to, regardless of how the photo is tagged.)

ED
Your post has prompted me to investigate as I have recently come across the same issue.
I have a Canon 20d and have set it to use AdobeRGB colour space. I recently noticed that a JPEG image file appears as untagged in the metadata in Elements 5 Organiser but when in the editor it confirms it has the AdobeRGB space as the "Image/Convert Colour profile" instruction only offers to convert to sRGB or Remove Profile options. Furthermore the print dialogue confirms the presence of the AdobeRGB colour space. This has not been applied since importing from the camera as I have set the colour management option to "Let Me Choose" for this test.
The camera instruction book says if AdobeRGB is set in the camera the file name will start with an underscore: _MG which they do and that the ICC profile "is not appended" which may explain its absence in the metadata.
As you suggested, RAW files do not appear to carry a colour space regardless of the camera setting although the file name still starts with _MG so perhaps it does? but on conversion using Adobe ACR with Elements, it attaches the colour space to the resulting file depending on the colour management setting and will use Adobe RGB if I set it to Always optimise for printing.
I hope this helps.
Andrew Bealing

Color space from lightroom to flickr

Can anyone help me with this question....having developed raw images in lightroom, I then may publish some of them on my flickr account. When these images are exported directly from Lightroom to Flickr, are they automatically exported in sRGB?....especially considering that Lightroom is a ProPhoto RGB color managed application. I ask this because I know that people may look @ my images in non-color managed web browsers, like Internet Explorer, and if the images are exported in the ProPhoto RGB color space, the image colors will render poorly on that non-color managed web browser. Are they automatically exported in the web friendly sRGB?? Thanks for your comments:)

Perhaps you could help me with another question. I always shoot in raw and process using ProPhoto RGB throughout my entire workflow. However, 5 years ago, I shot in Jpeg. I couldn't tell you what colour space my camera was set to then. When editing those JPEGS in Lightroom, in what colour space should I apply to those images when I send them over to Photoshop? I know JPEGs already have a colour space applied, but the camera I used then is long gone and therefore can't remember if they were shot in sRGB or Adobe RGB. Also, whatever colour space I do use when exporting from Lightroom to Photoshop, I should set up Photoshop's working colour space to match the image's profile, correct? So, should I apply sRGB or Adobe RGB to my JPEGs when going from Lightroom to Photoshop?? Thanks:)

How do I change the preview mode background from black to white?

I am sure it is really simple but the solution seems to be totally eluding me.....

Can't find it in the Preferences? It should be under "Guides and Pasteboard", aptly called "Preview Background":
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/indesign/cs/using/WSa285fff53dea4f8617383751001ea8cb3f-714ba.h tml
Changing it only affects the current active document. If it's "doing it" for any new documents, then something caused it to be a global setting. Close all of your documents, then change the setting.

Color Space from RGB sRGB

Tried unchecking "Embed Color Profile" when saving a .psd to .jpg.
Still don't see the drop down menu for assignng color profile.
Where is the assign color profile to save or convert the color profile of image files?

Edit – Assign Profile
Edit – Convert to Profile
You might want to read up on the (very important) difference between the two if You haven’t yet.
Several threads in this forum concerning the matter exist.

Converting to different color space

Dear Color Management Guru's,
I have a question regarding converting digital files between color spaces. Is it correct to convert a file from a large color space like Adobe RGB to a smaller color space such as sRGB, or visa versa?
Thanks in advance,
TC

I recently participated in a webinar and the instructor advised that you should 'never convert from from a large space like Adobe RGB to a smaller space like sRGB.
That's not good advice.
Convert when you need to convert. sRGB for web. CMYK for offset, etc.
Furthermore, the instructor recommends that photographers set their cameras to capture in the sRGB space and then later convert to a larger space if the output device can accommodate it.
Also bad advice.
Capturing in sRGB hamstrings you from the outset. Almost every output device (monitor, inkjet, digital press, offset press) can exceed the color gamut of sRGB in at least one dimension. sRGB is the lowest common denominator of color spaces.
My training as a film photographer makes me think that you would want to capture your files with as much data as possible.
You are correct.
At the very least, capture in Adobe98. But you really should be capturing in RAW. It gives you the most leeway when editing the image.
My thinking is that files that are recorded in Adobe RGB and converted to sRGB do indeed loose date. However, the data that is discarded are colors that do not exist in a sRGB file, may be outside of what is perceptible by the eye, is outside of the ability of the output device to record, or colors that do not naturally exist in the subject to begin with.
Well, kinda...
The changes are definitely NOT "outside of what is perceptible by eye."
When moving from Adobe98 to sRGB, you lose a significant amount of color in the blue/cyan part of the spectrum. Try it. Take an image that's been captured in RAW and processed into Adobe98 (or, just captured straight into Adobe98) and contains a deep blue sky or the kind of turquoise you see in a swimming pool or tropical ocean. Convert that image to sRGB and notice what happens to those blues and turquioses. Yuck. But, it is what it is. If the image is headed for the web, that's what you're dealing with.
One question:
Did you pay money for this webinar? You may want to try and get it back.
Beware of the advice you hear on the internet.

Correct export color space for wide gamut monitors.

Running a photography studio I have 4 typical scenarios of how clients or end users will see my photo work. I create and edit the photos using LR 3 on a HP 2475w (wide gamut) monitor. I'm aware that there are color shifts, but trying to figure out which export color space to use to be most consistent.
A) Wide Gamut monitor using color managed software or browser such as Firefox.
B) Wide Gamut monitor NOT using color managed software such as IE 8.
C) Standard monitor using color managed software or browser such as Firefox.
D) Standard monitor NOT using color managed software such as IE 8.
A) gives the best results and that's what I run myself. No matter the color space that I export (sRGB, aRGB, or my custom calibrated ICC) the images appear to be correct 100%
B) gives mixed results...the hosting site for my photos seems to oversaturate a bit when I view the photos in their preview size which is what my clients see, when I view the original photo in full resolution (this feature disabled for my clients to avoid them downloading full rez copies of images), then the images appears a bit dull (70%). When I try this same scenario using aRGB export, it looks better (90-95%). When I export it using my monitor profile then the photo is spot on 100% however my monitor profile shows the photo incorrectly when viewing it using the standard Windows Vista photo viewer, it appears lighter and less saturated which I guess I expect since it's not color managed.
C) On a standard monitor the photos all look the same regardless of color space export so long as I use a color managed browser such as Firefox.
D) This gives pretty much the same breakdown of results as scenario B above. At the moment, it appears that when I use my custom ICC profile which is the calibration of my monitor...I get the best web results.
However my custom ICC profile gives me the worst local results within my windows viewer and when my clients load the photos on their machines, no doubt they will look just as bad on theirs regardless of which monitor they use. So aRGB seems to be the best choice for output. Anyone else do this? It's significantly better when viewing in IE on both Wide Gamut and Standard LCD's when compared to sRGB.
I would guess that my typical client has a laptop with Windows and they will both view the photos locally and upload them on the web, so it needs to look as close to what it looks like when I'm processing it in LR and Photoshop as possible. I know that a lot of people ask questions about their photos being off because they don't understand that there's a shift between WG and non-WG monitors, but I get that there's a difference...question is which color space export has worked best for others.

I am saying that since images on the internet are with extremely few
exceptions targeted towards sRGB. It is extremely common for those images to
not contain ICC profiles even if they really are sRGB. If they do not
contain ICC profiles in the default mode in Firefox, Firefox (as well as
Safari btw, another color managed browser), will not convert to the monitor
profile but will send the image straight to the monitor. This means that on
a wide gamut display, the colors will look oversaturated. You've no doubt
seen this on your display, but perhaps you've gotten used to it. If you
enable the "1" color management mode, Firefox will translate every image to
the monitor profile. This will make the colors on your display more
realistic and more predictable (since your monitor's very specific
properties no longer interfere and the image's colors are displayed as they
really are) for many sites including many photographic ones. This is most
important on a wide gamut display and not that big of a deal on a standard
monitor, which usually is closer to sRGB.
It seems you are suggesting that for a wide-gamut display it is better to
try using your own monitor's calibration profile on everything out there,
assuming on images posted with a wider gamat it will get you more color
range while there would be nothing lost for images posted in sRGB.
Indeed. The point of color management is to make the specific
characteristics of your monitor not a factor anymore and to make sure that
you see the correct color as described in the working space (almost always
sRGB on the web). This only breaks down when the color to be displayed is
outside of the monitor's gamut. In that case the color will typically get
clipped to the monitor's gamut. The other way around, if your original is in
sRGB and your monitor is closer to adobeRGB, the file's color space is
limiting. For your monitor, you want to make the system (Firefox in this
case) assume that untagged files are in sRGB as that is what the entire
world works in and translate those to the monitor profile. When you
encounter adobeRGB or wider files (extremely rare but does happen), it will
do the right thing and translate from that color space to the monitor
profile.
Wide gamut displays are great but you have to know what you are doing. For
almost everybody, even photographers a standard gamut monitor is often a
better choice. One thing is that you should not use unmanaged browsers on
wide gamut displays as your colors will be completely out of whack even on
calibrated monitors. This limits you to Firefox and Safari. Firefox has the
secret option to enable color management for every image. Safari doesn't
have this. There is one remaining problem, which is flash content on
websites. Flash does not color manage by default and a lot of flash content
will look very garish on your wide gamut display. This includes a lot of
photographer's websites.

Color space conversion problem when importing JPEG's

Hi,
I'm currently playing with the trial version of LR. While importing JPEG's with different color spaces (sRGB and Adobe RGB) to LR I've noticed a strange effect: There is a small but noticable difference in color, depending if the JPEG was previously saved in AdobeRGB, or sRGB. All the images I've tested so far should not contain critical colors that exceed normal sRGB. When opened in CS2 both versions of a JPEG, AdobeRGB and sRGB, typically look perceptually identical, no matter if I leave the sRGB image to sRGB, or convert it to the working space (AdobeRGB). Also my color-managed image viewer behaves as it should. So I don't think it's a matter of the different color spaces.
Looking at the imported images in LR I would say that the AdobeRGB image is correctly converted while the sRGB image suffers from a slight reddish cast, most noticable in skin tones. The effect is not as strong as if I would load the sRGB image into CS2 and skip color conversion to my working space (AdobeRGB).
The sRGB versions of the JPEG's were obtained from the AdobeRGB JPEG's using CS2 for conversion.
Anyone else here experienced a similar problem? Is this a bug in the xRGB-to-ProPhotoRGB conversion of LR, or a feature?
/Steffen

Hi Uli,
thanks for pointing me to your thread. I followed the discussion with great interest. Actually, I think the effect I am describing here is of different nature and a LOT stronger, at least for the type of images I've tested.
I did some more experiments yesterday with interesting results:
1) When I export a processed RAW from LR to JPEG or PSD, no matter what Color Space (I tested AdobeRGB, sRGB and ProphotoRGB), and re-import those JPEG/PSD's to LR, they look absolutely identical to the RAW I started with. Also, at first glance, they look similar when opened in CS2, but only because I tested with color images. I can indeed see small differences when testing with B/W, as you described in your "Color management bug" thread.
2) When I change the color space of an PSD or JPEG inside CS2 (I used the default setting 'relative colorimetric') and save it to JPEG and then import this JPEG to LR, colors are far off. The strength of this mostly reddish color cast depends on the color space of the imported JPEG, strongest for Prophoto, less strong for Adobe and sRGB. Interestingly, when I convert the color space inside CS2 and save the result to PSD, it will display correctly when imported in LR. Another interesting side effect: the thumbnails of LR-exported JPEG's in the "Open" dialogs of CS2 and LR (I guess those are not color-managed) show the typical color-flatness for the Adobe and even more the ProPhoto version. For the CS2-converted JPEG's, all thumbnails look just a colorful as the thumbnail of the sRGB version.
3) Such an image which doesn't display correctly in LR will keep its color cast when exported again to a JPEG (not sure about PSD). So something goes wrong with the color conversion during the import of such CS2-converted images.
My explanation so far is that CS2 uses a slightly different way of coding the colorspace information in the metadata of JPEG's which somehow prevents LR to recognise the color space correctly.
Can you confirm this behaviour?
Steffen

The availability of color space in RAW, TIFF and JPEG files

This is useful if your new to DSLR photography.
This is Nikon response on my question in the discussion: View photo metadata
I'm assuming that you know that Adobe RGB shows about 50% and sRGB 35% of CIELAB color space.
In a DSLR camera like the Nikon D800 you can select a color space (Adobe RGB or sRGB) in the shooting menu.
In Adobe Lightroom 4.3 the RAW metadata shows no color space info. Therefore I asked why not?
In the (Dutch) Nikon D800 manual on page 84 (about RAW) and 274 (about color space) and Nikon FAQ website there is no descripton about the color space availability/behavior in RAW, JPEG and TIFF files.
In the book "Mastering the Nikon D800 by Darrel Young" on page 125 - 126 is written: "If you shoot in RAW format a lot, you may want to consider using Adobe RGB....."
All experts on this forum answered: color space does not apply/affect the RAW data file or RAW files have no color space.
The respone of Nikon Europe Support (Robert Vermeulen) was: In Nikon D800 NEF RAW files both color spaces (Adobe RGB and sRGB) are always physically available. In JPEG and TIFF files only the in the shooting menu selected color space is physically available. So the forum experts gave the correct answer!
Of course you can convert afterwards a JPEG or TIFF file with sRGB color space to Adobe RGB but you don't get more colors.
When you install the Microsoft Camera Codec Pack or FastPictureViewer Codec Pack they only show color space metadata for JPEG and TIFF files and nothing for RAW because color space "doesn't exist". I thought the codec packs removed the color space metadata for my RAW files.
Adobe Lightroom also can not show color space for RAW files because that "doesn't exist".

Van-Paul wrote:
The respone of Nikon Europe Support (Robert Vermeulen) was: In Nikon D800 NEF RAW files both color spaces (Adobe RGB and sRGB) are physically available. In JPEG and TIFF files only the in the shooting menu selected color space is physically available.
I still think this is an evasive answer that doesn't really pinpoint the exact chain of events that take place. They are:
1. The raw file contains the naked data captured by the sensor. This is just a very dark grayscale image.
2. In the raw converter it is encoded into a working color space to process the information. In Lightroom this is known as "Melissa RGB", or linear gamma Prophoto. It is also demosaiced to bring back the color information.
3. From Lightroom it can be exported to one of the familiar color spaces like sRGB or Adobe RGB. This is, in principle at least, a normal profile conversion.
These three steps are what the camera does to produce a jpeg. So the basic steps are the same, the camera is just doing it automatically (and usually butchering the image in the process...).
This Darrell Young is, I'm sure, an excellent photographer, but in this he is seriously confused and just propagating a common myth. Anyway, thanks for bringing up this discussion, hope you didn't object too much to the tone of the answers... Our only concern here was to get this right and with no room for misunderstanding.

Color space and profiles clarifications

Does FCPX consider the embedded color profile of my clips ?
What is the default color space of FCPX projects ? (if any)
Can I select a specific color profile for my projects ?
My clips (according to after effect_cs6>interpret footage>color management) have this color profile embedded: HDTV (Rec. 709) Y'CbCr, but if I check out the same clip once transcoded to prores422 by FCPX there is no color profile anymore. What's goin on ?
I come from the photography world and we consider color profiles very important, what should I know about them when working with video ?
Thanks a lot

Thanks TOm, what do you mean internally ? In AE I can select a color space from a long list for my projects while FCPX discard the color profiles from the imported clips... how can it even manage them ?
Thanks

CS5.5 crashes when I change work space from editing to color correction

When I change my work space from editing to color correction CS5.5 crashes.
Can get it to change from editing to audio work space without crashing, but when I want to change back from audio to editing it crashes then too.
Any help appreciated.

In my quick search (check me out there), THIS DRIVER appears to be the latest. I would install and test with it. I find it a good idea to do a System Restore Point for before a driver install, and to also keep a few older drivers available, just in case one needs to roll-back.
Good luck,
Hunt

Is there anyway to change/add more highlighter colors in Preview? I need more colors aside from those already provided in the app.

I'm a law student and I use the preview app extensively for reading cases. I need more highlighter colors aside from those already provided and it seems that there's no possible way of adding/changing the colors.

Unlike Preview, the Adobe Reader application allows you to change PDF highlight (comment) text colors via a standard Apple color chooser. Click Tools on the Reader Toolbar, and then Comment. The second button in the Comment Annotation section is highlight text, and defaults to canary yellow.
Highlight the document text, and then two-finger tap/control-right-click that highlighted text. On the contextual menu, you will see Properties…. The properties panel has a color well set to yellow. Click this color well, and a standard Apple color chooser will appear that allows you more creative control over your highlight color. When you click a color in the color chooser, it is not automatically updated in the color well, which remains dark grey. When you quit the color chooser, the selected color is updated in this color well and in your document. The next text that you select to highlight will receive a default yellow highlight.

Color changes in preview

Hello, I'm so tired trying to figure out the reason of a problem in Premiere Pro (my version is 6.0.4). I'm very frustrated just because I've spent too much time trying to solve the problem which is so ridiculous! What I'm doing is just trying to color corect my footage with the help of Color Finesse plugin. The problem is that I can see different results in full screen Color Finesse preview and PP windows preview. Sure you could kick me off this forum saying that it's not Premiere Pro but 3-d party plugin problem but I want to tell you that it's not!
The point is that I can see the right result of the color correction in Premiere Pro when I'm scrolling the preview unless I mouse up to stop the timeline cursor being dragged. Once I just mouse up the image in preview changes! I even set up the similar options of resolution for playback and pause in preview but I still can see the same issue. I also tried to change the sequence options of preview rendering (max bit depth, max rendering quality) but all in vain. I surely get this result when exporting - it seems that PP use in this situation the same rendering engine as what is shown in preview when the cursor stops.
But what really confuses me that in dragging timeline cursor mode I can see the proper colors that I made with Color Finesse! Isn't it an issue?! Haven't anybody noticed anything similar? The image in my case seems to be more red and whites are cut. I thought that there is might be some problems with color spaces but I just don't know what to do in Premiere! I tried to color correct my footage in After Effects with the same Color Finesse settings and then export it - everything is ok with colors! But not in premiere! By the way in both cases of exporting (premiere, after effects) I can see that the result image is in YUV color space with chroma subsampling 4:2:0, 8 bits, progressive though I choose RGB in After Effects when exporting (I can see it in Media Player Classic's properties of the footage).
Please, can anyone help me with this issue or is it really an Adobe Premiere bug?
I thought that there are some problems with color spaces and tried to watch YC waveform. But I guess that my original footage was even worse in it though I can not see any issues or color cutting with my original footage in premiere pro window. Color finesse window show another results. What's happening?...

Thank you, Bob, for answering. And I would also would like to thank you for creating such a convenient instrument for After Effects (cause you see - I seem to can not use it under premiere pro).
I guessed that in dragging mode PPro tried to optimise rendering in different ways clipping it from all the sides etc. But the problem is that all is vice versa: I do like the result in dragging mode and it's the same as in full Color Cinesse instrument and I can see clipping in stop cursor preview mode. Unfortunately there is no any difference on Ppro YCwaveform in this two modes (dragging, stop cursor) so I have to load images from footages (from Composite Video view).
That's why It does not help that the result I see in PPro when not dragging is what will render to my final output (maybe I'm wrong, maybe highlights are not cut but just more reddish...but I can feel more difference in video - the first one looks much better).
Do I correctly understand that dragging mode differs from stopping not just in that 8-bit image is handed instead of 32-bit but also that the first one is RGB but the second one is YUV (there are no YUV modes in Color Finesse full interface in some reason)? So is it possible that clipping happens with 32-bit YUV image? We could test your plugin by feeding it my original video footage (you should test it in PPro) - if you wish - and you could see - why there is difference (I understand that it may take some time so I seem to not wait to the results and find another way of color correcting though I very much like Color Finesse).
So - I'm sorry. In this case the problem seems to be exactly in Color Finesse? But anyway I don't understand why not implement Color Management in PPro such as it's done in After Effects or maybe even better by having several options. I think that sometimes you'd better have several options instead having no ability to do something.
P.S. Bob, I also have a suggestion for your plugin - it's kind of UI improvement. It's a good idea to have the ability to reset each option (each slider) by just double clicking on it's name just as it's done in Lightroom.

PSE 10 as external editor for Aperture 3 - 8-bit TIFF and what color space?

Hi all,
I'm taking the plunge and trying PSE 10 as my external editor for Aperture 3. I understand that I need to export as 8-bit TIFF files (not 16) because PSE can't do certain things with 16-bit files. Is that right? Should I specify a color space in Aperture or leave it as "no profile selected"? (I don't know much about color spaces; I'm not a pro.) I print on an Epson RX580 Stylus Photo printer, if that matters.
I'll be grateful for any help and advice. Thanks.

Can I suggest you buy Philip Andrews book, Advanced Photoshop Elements 10. he explains colour spaces and much much more very clearly and exactly what can be done with 16 bit files and what you then have to change to 8 bit to accomplish. He's written basic and advanced guides for Elements since day one. Usually available from Amazon for under £20.

External editor color space with Aperture and PSE 10?

Hi all,
I'm finally setting up Aperture to export to Photoshop Elements (10). In the Aperture preferences, I'm asking it to export to PSE 10 as 16-bit TIFF files. What color space should I indicate (if any)? It's currently set to "no profile selected." I'm not a professional; just an enthusiast. I print on an Epson RX580 Photo Stylus printer, if that matters.
I've searched on this forum and elsewhere, but haven't found a simple answer to this. All suggestions gratefully accepted. Thanks!

Can I suggest you buy Philip Andrews book, Advanced Photoshop Elements 10. he explains colour spaces and much much more very clearly and exactly what can be done with 16 bit files and what you then have to change to 8 bit to accomplish. He's written basic and advanced guides for Elements since day one. Usually available from Amazon for under £20.

Change Aperture previews color space from Adobe98 to sRgb

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for