File Info - Color Space: Uncalibrated

In File | File Info there is lots of interesting data about the camera, lens etc. There is also one field that says 'Color Space: Uncalibrated'.
Should this be calibrated? Is it important, will it make any difference to my pictures if it is calibrated, and how does one go about calibrating it (presumably the camera)?
FWIW the camera is always used on a copy stand, so same lights etc every time, so calibration might be a good thing.
Thanks - Brian

Ansel most likely would have loved Photoshop. He was far from representative photography and manipulated extensively. His ideas were around the concept of bringing out the subject matter, if that required suppression of certain aspects to do so. If all that is required is to be unobtrusive as possible, then previsualization would be unnecessary. His mantra was to make a photograph, not take a photograph, which he found distasteful; to "take". One can only make them consistently by using all that your tools can offer.
I also attempt to get it done in ACR so far as possible, because some steps do look better in ACR than in PS, such as b&w conversion. Wait, not better, different. ACR allows fine tuning across a wider color palette than PS, but dramatizing is better accomplished in PS conversion, albeit with a noisier image likely. Finally, the one tool in PS for which I find no equivalent or better in ACR is Shadow/Highlight, which sometimes I do run as a Smart Object. What you give up as a Smart Object is a number of other tools become greyed out.
I do use the plan mode as well, D.
BTW, as I was walking down my street, a car pulled out of the driveway with "Fosse" on the license plate, preceded by initials neither of which was a D. I thought for a moment "wouldn't it be funny if we lived just down the street from each other all these years?"

Similar Messages

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.

Photoshop and Bridge Color Space Mismatches

I've recently scanned a number of photos (.TIFF) using the Wide Gamut Color Space (Nikon AdobeWide 4.0.0.3000).
Bridge shows:
Color Mode = RGB
Color Profile = Nikon AdobeWide 4.0.0.3000
However when I open them using the embedded profile, Photoshop CS5 shows on the file Info/Camera Data Tab
Color Space = sRGB, or
Color Space = Uncalibrated.
I opened the files in IDImager to see what it showed. It had under Technical Data
Color Space = AdobeRGB
Color Profile = Nikon AdobeWide 4.0.0.3000
So, Bridge and IDImager seem fine; Photoshop seems to have some difficulty.
The monitor is calibrated.
Why would Photoshop behave in this way? Is there anything I should be concerned about in what PS may be doing.
Dale

Probably something to do with your Edit->Color Settings. Is the second RGB dropdown set to Convert to Working RGB?

Save PNG as gray color space

Hi all,
I've searched high and low for a good answer to this, but no luck so far:
I have an AI file that I wish to save as a mask for an app.
The image has to be:
Format:               PNG
Color space:        Gray
Alpha Channel:    No
I have set the following for my AI file: Document raster effect settings: Colormode: Grayscale
I have changed Edit -> Edit colors -> Convert to grayscale (but the "Convert to grayscale" text is not grayed out the next time I look in the menu, problem?)
I then save the file for Web and Devices as a PNG-24 or PNG-8 (Grayscale, no dither) but no matter how I save it the file info still says that the "Color Space" of the file is RGB. I can't get it to save the file with Color Space: Gray.
I am doing somthing wrong, but what?
Any help would be greatly appreciated!!
Kind regards,
Smulan

Thanks for your answer Larry!
I was afraid of that... I tried everything.
However, I still have a PNG file on my Mac that has "Color Space: Grey" when I look att it in file information.
Incorrect file with RGB:
Correct file with Gray (not created by me):
Sorry about the Swedish . "Färgrymd" is "Color Space"
So there is some information stored in the correct file that I seem to be unable to save using AI. Maybe I need to use some other program... The files I created with Grey scale and saved are useless when creating the mask unfortunately.
Kind regards,
Åsa

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.

Question: sRGB color space profile icm

I am trying to convert a file to color space sRGB color space profile.icm. The profile is located in my library on my hard drive under recommended profiles but it does not appear in the drop down menu under edit/convert to profile. Any ideas about why? I have performed this task on my MAC at my college but can't seem to do it on my MAC in my studio...

LR converts them to the colorspace specified on the Export panel. There are several choices, including sRGB. You may need to expand various sections to see the option.

Color spaces not sticking...?

What's Confusing: I have a layered file, the color space assigned to it is sRGB. I save a png file via Save For Web, tick the option to convert export to sRGB. All looks good in the save for web 2-up preview. But when I open the new png file, it's color profile is set to Adobe RGB, and the color space looks off—not like it did in the SFW preview.
Details: My default color space is Adobe RGB. Sync'd across all CS5 apps. I have the option ticked to warn me on profile mismatches when opening a file. So far so good.
So it seems like my Working Space color (Adobe RGB) is overriding SFW settings as well as my document color space settings
Same thing happens when saving as a jpg.
Any thoughts?

To erase, delete or reset Save For Web & Devices SFW preferences:
Open a small .jpg in Photoshop (to ungray the File menu).
Mac: Press and hold Option+Command keys, while File> Save For Web Devices (you will get a prompt confirming you want to erase all Save for Web preferences).
Windows PC: Press and hold Control+Alt keys, while File> Save For Web Devices (you will get a prompt confirming you want to erase all Save for Web preferences).
that should configure SFW default settings to CONVERT your Photoshop Source Space to sRGB and strip the ICC profile by default
How to reset Photoshop's preferences using special key combinations (most Adobe apps use this method of keystrokes):
First Quit Photoshop.
Mac: Press and hold Command+Option+Shift keys, while opening Photoshop (you will get a prompt confirming you want to delete the Adobe Photoshop settings folder).
Windows PC: Press and hold Alt+Control+Shift keys, while opening Photoshop (you will get a prompt confirming you want to delete the Adobe Photoshop settings folder).

Color Space Problems w/ Files?

I use Lightroom 2.5 to manage my photos. There are several things I don't understand regarding embedded color spaces in files.
When I export a file from LR to Photoshop CS4 as a TIF in the Adobe RGB color space the file shows as "Uncalibrated" in the EXIF & XMP metadata.
Using PS CS4, if I save a JPG file from the above Adobe RGB TIF file, and then use the edit -> convert to profile function, with Destination Space -> Adobe RGB selected, toggling the preview check box shows a color shift in the image. If I convert an image to the same color space why is there a color shift?
Is the color profile stored in the EXIF or XMP metadata?
Jack

I can provide some general information on the topic, though I do not use Lightroom so thers may jump in.
Information about color space is contained within the tiff file proper. That is, in a tag (the T in TIFF) and if I am correct it is tag 262 (PhotometricInterpretation). I do not know if LR also puts this info into the metadata.
When you convert a file to jpg you invoke the YCbCr color space and convert your source data into it. That is, the "compression" process also involves a color space change if you did not start out with YCbCr. This could account for the color shift you are seeing.
Paulo

The Organizer does not support the color space in the file

I just purchased and installed PSE 8 as an upgrade to PSE 6. My catalog correctly shows all of my existing images. However, when I try to import photos into the Organizer, I get a message that nothing was imported. The reason given is that "The Organizer does not support the color space in the file." This happens with photos taken on my iPhone as well as those from my Canon PowerShot A1100 IS. Any suggestions?
Here is my system information:
Elements Organizer 8.0.0.0
Core Version: 8.0 (20090905.r.605812)
Language Version: 8.0 (20090905.r.605812)
Current Catalog:
Catalog Name: My Catalog
Catalog Location: C:/Documents and Settings/All Users/Application Data/Adobe/Elements Organizer/Catalogs/My Catalog
Catalog Size: 83.9MB
Catalog Cache Size: 459.8MB
System:
Operating System Name: XP
Operating System Version: 5.1 Service Pack 3
System Architecture: AMD CPU Family:15 Model:11 Stepping:1 with MMX, SSE Integer, SSE FP
Built-in Memory: 2GB
Free Memory: 829MB
Important Drivers / Plug-ins / Libraries:
Microsoft DirectX Version: 9.0
Apple QuickTime Version: 7.65
Adobe Reader Version: 9.2
Adobe Acrobat Version: Not installed
CD and DVD drives:
J: (SONY DVD BUS: 3 ID: 3 Firmware: RW)

It turns out that this problem went away after the program crashed. Everything seems to be working well now.

Exporting photos for UHDTV or Native 4K TV, what are the best settings ? (File: Quality File: Color Space, Image Sizing and resolution) Or in other words; How can I get the smallest files but keep good quality for display on new UHDTV

Exporting photos for UHDTV or Native 4K TV, what are the best settings ? (File: Quality File: Color Space, Image Sizing and resolution) Or in other words; How can I get the smallest files but keep good quality for display on new UHDTV

You're welcome, and thank you for the reply.
2) Yesterday I made the subclips with the In-Out Points and Command-U, the benefit is that I've seen the clip before naming it. Now I'm using markers, it's benefit is that I can write comment and (the later) clip name at once, the drawback is that I have to view to the next shot's beginning before knowing what the shot contains.
But now I found out that I can reconnect my clips independently to the format I converted the master clip to. I reconnected the media to the original AVI file and it worked, too! The more I work with, the more I'm sold on it... - although it doesn't seem to be able to read and use the date information within the DV AVI.
1) Ok, I tried something similar within FCE. Just worked, but the file size still remains. Which codec settings should I use? Is the export to DV in MOV with a quality of 75% acceptable for both file size and quality? Or would be encoding as H.264 with best quality an option for archiving, knowing that I have to convert it back to DV if I (maybe) wan't to use it for editing later? Or anything else?
Thank's in advance again,
André

Possible to get the color space and resolution from the .eps file

Hi all,
We have using the InDesign CS3 5.0.4, windows, javascript. We need to get the color space and resolution of the graphics (.eps) file using scripting.
The properties of the image like (actualPpi and effectivePpi will return the value only for the .tiff. and .jpg etc) but it will not return the .eps file resolution values.
Kindly give me the suggesting for the decrepancies.
Regards,
Nagaraj

... open them programmatically in PhotoShop, read out resolution and color space ...
On opening them in Photoshop, it asks you "what resolution shall I use, and what color space shall I apply?"
A single EPS may contain any number of embedded bitmaps, with any horizontal and vertical resolution, and in any color space. You can use only a few of these with Illustrator -- and even only one at a time with Photoshop --, but other programs allow just about every possible combination.
Not to mention procedurally generated bitmaps, also possible with PostScript.

Color space in file?

has anyone seen this error message, 'Organizer does not support color space in the file'? Pls help

Elements does RGB, sRGB, Adobe RGB, index, grayscale. It doesn't do CMYK, LAB, etc.

Color Space info for images

Hi all,
I would like to show the color space details for an image. Do you know what field mapping is required?
Thanks,
A.

>> images are still a bit washed out with a warmish/ yellow cast to them, particularly, my black and white images
Here is a simple test to help evaluate if the monitor profile is reasonably good:
Open a RGB file in Photoshop (flatten if not already flattened).
Press M key> Drag a selection> Com+Shift+U (Desaturate).
Com+Z (to toggle back and forth).
If the unsaturated selection looks neutral you've got a reasonably fair monitor profile.
If selection has color casts (not neutral) -- you have a bad monitor profile
+++++
Here is a simple test to help evaluate if a bad monitor profile is whacking out your Photoshop color:
Monitors/Displays (control panel)> Color> highlight AppleRGB or sRGB (don't run Calibrate), quit and reboot.
If the Photoshop colors are back under control, then the problem was most surely a bad monitor profile go back into Monitors/Displays> Color and Calibrate a good profile highlight (load) sRGB, or preferably, the monitor's OEM profile as a starting point.
If you are using a puck, it is likely defective; or your monitor hardware is the culprit...search it on Google by model number

Color space of embedded files

Is there a way to determine the color space of a file that is embedded in Illustrator?

Usually an embedded file is the same color space as the AI file.
Only when you open a PDF generated elsewhere this might also be something like multichannel.

File Info - Color Space: Uncalibrated

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for