IPhoto 5 and Adobe RGB - RGB 1998

Dear fellow members,
1. I've been using iPhoto 5 for a couple of years and haven't questionned about this version <<compatible>> with Adobe RGB (RGB 1998). I understand that the sRGB is already an embedded profile of iPhoto 5, but is Adobe RGB embedded either?
The reason I ask this question is because I wish to work in Adobe RGB, from my new digital still camera, to my other post-processing softwares [from Adobe and Phase One manufacturers].
I understand that Adobe RGB offers some more tonalities and color spectrum, this is the reason why I wish to move from sRGB to Adobe RGB.
2. If I wish to publish photos on the web, I should be careful about exporting in sRGB for a broader audience, though.
But does iPhoto knows it automatically, I'm not sure, however, I can try to convert to sRGB in Preview.app and compare...
3. Looking at pictures on a browser, Safari, or Firefox also differs: Safari manages Adobe RGB, but not Firefox
(see e.g. http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html) .
4. From what I've learnt, I also had to recalibrate my Ti667 screen from the Apple preset 1.8 to Gamma 2.2.
5. Finally what does Generic RGB mean in the OS X system?
Thank you for your comments and responses.
Best Regards.

Mr. Scuttles:
1 - It depends on what camera you're using as to the profile used. Canon cameras use a profile titled Camera RGB. It's an RGB profile that is very similar to the other RGBs except for the Adobe. The Adobe has a wider gamut (range) of colors. If your camera embeds Adobe when you shoot then you don't have to do anything.
2 - If you edit in iPhoto the modified version will retain its Adobe RGB profile. So if you plan on using the photos on the web and want to use sRGB you will have to embed that profile with a 3rd party application. I've modified a ColorSync Applescript to do that. You can download it from Toad's Cellar. It's much faster than using Preview as it can do batches of photos at one time. Just drop the files or a folder of file on it and let it do it's stuff. It's a lossless process. It's a tad slow however, but does a very good job.
5 - See this Technical document for the Generic RGB and Apple RGB differences: http://developer.apple.com/qa/qa2005/qa1430.html
If you open the ColorSync Utility application (in the Applications/Utilities folder) you can view and compare the various profiles.
Do you Twango?

Similar Messages

Color management: Adobe RGB 1998 issues in print module

When printing to a JPEG file from the Print Module, I've noticed that the "Adobe RGB" profile differs substantially from the "Adobe RGB (1998)" profile supplied with Windows.
When viewed with Photoshop, the "Adobe RGB" images are much more saturated than the image previews from the Lightroom window. Photoshop displays the same "Adobe RGB (1998)" profile for both files.
I have tried to reinstall Lightroom, but this has not solved the problem.
It seems that when selecting "Adobe RGB", Lightroom is in fact converting the image to sRGB, but embeds the "Adobe RGB (1998)" profile.
ICC profile selection: http://julianchoquette.com/fichiers/forum/lightroom-color-a.png
This will output files that look like the previews in Lightroom: http://julianchoquette.com/fichiers/forum/lightroom-color-b.png
Profile selection pop-up: http://julianchoquette.com/fichiers/forum/lightroom-color-c.png

Yeah that is completely different. My guess is that this is the bug I mentioned before. It should not happen but clearly does. It works normally on my system (I just tried again).
>Note that both dialogs do not display exactly the same name for the Lightroom provided Adobe RGB profile. http://julianchoquette.com/fichiers/forum/lightroom-export-dialog.png
That's normal and doesn't mean anything. On my computer it actually says "AdobeRGB" without the (1998) that yours shows but I believe that's simply a difference between the Mac and PC version. You can try whether it does the same thing if you select prophoto. But somebody with Vista x64 and LR 2.3 should try the same thing to see if this is a bug specific to the PC version of LR.

Changing Colour Space - How do I save an image in Adobe RGB 1998?

I wish to submit an image but it is required to be "Saved in Adobe RGB 1998 colour space".
Any suggestions?

Export it an open it with Preview and assign Adobe RGB using preview
LN

Why are previews in Adobe RGB (1998) ?

In experimenting with emailing previews from Aperture I noticed they were washed out when displayed on the Windows PC that received them.
I dragged a preview to the Mac desktop and choose “get info” to see that the Profile Name is Adobe RGB (1998)
If I export (using the export function) the same file it’s profile name is sRGB Profile.
Why is this, and is there anyway to have previews use the sRGB Profile?

First - Yes, if you view a photo saved in the Adobe RGB color space and open it in a program (or computer) that is expecting a photo in the sRGB color space, the colors will looked washed out or pastel and not show the vibrant colors you original intended.
Adobe RGB is most commonly used by professionals submitting to publications. Unless your client says otherwise, I would submit your photos to them in the Adobe RGB color space.
Corbis, for example, asks their photographers to use the Adobe RGB color space because that's what most of their clients ask for.
I use sRGB for my family photos, emailing photos to friends, and the web.
Second - If I understand your question right,
You can set your email export preset in Aperture's preference window. From there you set your file format, size, compression, AND your color space.
PowerBook G4 Mac OS X (10.4.8) Chief Photographer, Press-Telegram

Adobe RGB (1998)

Aperture seems to have changed all my pic profiles to Adobe RGB (1998) and I know no reason why. Can anyone help?

Raw files actually do not have a color space. A raw file is just a collection of data and not an image in the traditional sense, it is not an image until it is converted by the software either in the camera (if shooting JPG) or on the computer.
The EXIF entry makes no difference with a raw file, Aperture fills it in but it would be more correct if it was left blank. You do not need to worry about color space until you export the image from Aperture and then you would set it to what you need for your workflow.
If you search for somehting like color space raw files on the web you'll find more detailed information concernig this but the answer is basically the same, raw files do not have a color space.
regards

SRGB in 5d Mark 2 are saved as Adobe RGB (1998) in CS5

I used to think that was my mistake in the camera, but if that is normal, it's just not fair. I know I have to convert, but I don't see why this change.

I apologize for mixing things up, i have both CS3 and CS5 on the dock, but i was actually using CS3 because i want to stay with the tried and truth
for this thing, so i had set RGB in the camera, but my pictures are, as default, checked as Adobe RGB (1998) as a color space in the save as dialogue box, is this what you mean by color settings? i said, I know how to convert, but i don't see why CS3 should change my color space.

Adobe RGB (1998) Missmatch

When I do the following:
1) Importing an image into Aperture (eater saved in Camera as Adobe RGB (1998) or in Photoshop CS3 with Adobe RGB (1998)
2) Within Aperture: Edit with Adobe Photoshop CS3
then Photoshop gives me this Mismatch Window:
Embedded: Adobe RGB (1998)
Working Space: Adobe RGB (1998)
OSX 10.5.4 has an Adobe RGB (1998) Profile so does Adobe CS3.
How can I solve this Mismatch. The same Profile is in two locations.
a) Library: Application Support: Adobe: Color: Profiles: Recommended: AdobeRGBN1998.icc
b) System: Library: ColorSync: Profiles: AdobeRGB.icc
bc

Odd thatn it would give you a mismatch when they're the same profile.
In Photoshop go to Edit >> Color Settings
Make sure RGB is set to Adobe RGB (1998) in the Working Spaces area.
Also make sure that RGB is set to Preserve Embedded Profiles in the Color Management Policies area. This setting should stop the error messages unless you have "Ask when Opening" checked.
Thay's all I can think of.
DLS

Color Spaces CIE and Adobe RGB

Looking at monitor specs, usually, the color space of the monitor is given in terms of a target color space, like 96% Adobe RGB. Some give several, but along comes Dell, u2412, and they supply one: 82% CIE.
I know what CIE is, but making a guesstimate from the Dell spec requires more than what I presently know about such matters.
So, what are the expectations? Is that a meaningful spec for comparison sake? IOW, how much does Adobe RGB enclose CIE 1976?
TIA
Lawrence

I went back to here:
http://forums.adobe.com/thread/916368?start=0&tstart=0
and ran some of those checks with the various presentations. Also, embarrassingly, I did know about the site but failed to go back when I looked for any test results for the 2412.
sic transit Gloria!
I also generated a step tablet in PS, as well as doing several calibration reruns. I did a calibration in "Standard"ode and one in "Custom" where I had access to RGB controls.
TFT Central did the same and claimed that the Custom was more troublesome and didn't yield any significant improvement. I beg to differ!
Also, they made available the results of the Standard and Custom as an ICC profile for users and I defy anyone to tell me there is no significant difference. Between my two calibrations and TFT's, I have 4 flavors from which to choose. Wow! I'm impressed (NOT!)
At any rate I settled on using my custom version as it shows the most neutral gray. It also showed the smaller dE both average and max deviation, 0.34 and 1.2 respectively, the only one exceeding 1.0. It also was close to the factory default than the others.
What a way to run a railroad!
The other fussbudget item is X-Rite. I doesn't like calibrating LCD. It manages to skip over steps along the way, and if I hadn't the experience and expectations step to step with my crt, I would probably be returning the Dell at this time. The differences from the data pov between my Custom and Average should be barely visible, but in fact, it is visually significant. Normal conclusions would hold the monitor at fault.
Off to contact X-Rite.
Lawrence

Keywords iphoto 6 and adobe bridge

So I've used adobe bridge to tag a bunch of photos. I then imported these photos into iphoto 6. For some reason a bunch of my keywords weren't imported with the images into iphoto. How can I get the keywords I used in bridge to show up in iphoto?

I don't know about any syncing in Bridge. I tagged all the photos in question at the same time, but for some reason iPhoto choses which keywords it wants to apply to the images. When I check my keywords in iPhoto all of the ones I created in Bridge are there--if they are checked when I select info on a certain image, well that's another story.

ProColor RGB or Adobe RGB ?

I have always run Adobe RGB on PS (now CS3)... have it "automatically convert".
*When I go to PS it is normally because the Output will be to a Printer in the End (and also a web version) ... (also have my camera set to Adobe RGB, "although" I always shoot RAW ... never know when you might run out of space lol)
OK, so because LR is PROphoto RGB ... is it NOW better to Export ALL my images from LR using PROphoto RGB and not have PS CS3 "auto convert" all my images to Adobe RGB anymore? (my default in PS CS3 is to work in Adobe RGB)
* YES, whenever I Print in office ... or send a Profiled JPG to a Printer SITE ... I am using a Printer ICC or converting to the ICC.
lol, have a feeling I might know the answer ... but want to confirm if it is in FACT better to be working in PROphoto RGB all the way?
And that most is doing it this way ....
HG

On 3/19/07 6:45 PM, "M Behrens" wrote:
Or is the "working color space" of LR inconsequential since you cannot get an image out of LR without seleting an embedded color space that the image is converted to? I read somewhere that ProPhotoRGB isn't really the working color space of LR, it mentioned Mellisa or Love Child. If LR has its own color space and simply converts on output. Monitor display is simply another output to sRGB, if calibrated having an ICC file to assist in conversion.
There are two color spaces to consider. One you can control, one you cant. The internal color space for all processing in LR is ProPhoto RGB using a linear encoding. We cant mess with that and theres no reason to.
We can export to three color spaces, two smaller than the internal color space (sRGB and Adobe RGB (1998)).
I dont have any issues doing everything in ProPhoto RGB 16-bit. With a totally raw workflow, thats easy. Where things get a tad dicey is using existing rendered images in LR. They have a color space before you import them. So in theory, you could be moving from sRGB to ProPhoto RGB (internal color space processing) then out to either sRGB again (which seems like a good idea) or Adobe RGB (1998) or finally, ProPhoto RGB. It would be cool if LR could somehow honor the original and output color space. So if you start with sRGB, you get sRGB (but again, theres a conversion to ProPhoto RGB/linear gamma if you do any corrections).
If you stick with 16-bits going out of LR, I doubt youll have an issue doing this theoretical sRGB to ProPhoto RGB dance but I suspect if the original color space was sRGB, that was for a reason and I suspect many want to honor that. Of course, if you start with a color space thats not one of the three spaces that are supported for export, its kind of moot. IOW, you can end up witb any color space you wish, as long as its sRGB, Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB.
Melissa RGB (Love Child RGB) is a cute name for the space thats used to represent the histogram and percentage values. Youre never really dealing with this space.
Applications dont have a color space? Well they use a color space for processing so yes. In the case of LR, the internal color space used is ProPhoto RGB as defined by this specs white point and primaries (chromaticity values) but using a linear encoding (what some would call a gamma of 1.0). Melissa RGB is the same expect its using the sRGB tone response curve (what would incorrectly be called a 2.2 gamma encoding). Then you have three options for a color space in which to encode your images upon export out of LR.

Colours wrong when RAW file with Adobe RGB profile printed from iPhoto '08

I've taken some photos on my Nikon D300 with the colourspace set to Adobe RGB. These import and display fine in iPhoto '08 but when printed it looks like the printer (Epson R2400 with the Epson 6.12 driver) is using the sRGB colourspace. The only option I can find relating to colour, is the Color matching dialogue which gives the option of Colorsync or Epson Color Controls. I've tried both with the same results. Preview shows the profile of the .nef file to be Adobe RGB (1998).
Has anyone any ideas of what I need to change?

AndyMn:
Welcome to the Apple Discussions. Most inkjet printers are geared for the sRGB profile. The Adobe profile is used by professional printers. Apple's services also recommend the sRGB profile. You need to reassign the sRGB or sRGBIEC1966-2.1 profile. I'm not sure about the raw file but you can use the ColorSync Utility to assign that profile to the file.
I have an Applescript that will apply the profile to files or folder of files dropped on it. I'm not sure if it will work on RAW files but it does on jpgs and tiffs. You can download it from Toad's Cellar. It takes about 6 seconds per file but does not apply any additional jpeg compression to jpg files.
Assigning the profile is considered better than the Applescript way but can only be done one at a time. You can test each method and see what gives you the best results.
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto (iPhoto.Library for iPhoto 5 and earlier) database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've created an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger or later), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. It's compatible with iPhoto 6 and 7 libraries and Tiger and Leopard. iPhoto does not have to be closed to run the application, just idle. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.≤br>
Note: There now an Automator backup application for iPhoto 5 that will work with Tiger or Leopard.

MPB 17" and what Adobe RGB color space coverage I might expect from it

Hello,
I am photographer and currently PC user. However, I plan to dive to the Mac’s world.
Before I become a Mac user, I have few questions.
Now I think about MacBook Pro 17”, i7 2.66MHz, 8GB RAM, 500 GB 7200rpm HDD and antiglare screen.
I plan to use additional monitor for photo editing.
I did search on google about *NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M* and *Adobe RGB color space* it covers, however, it gave me no results related to Mac. The only information about this card and Adobe colors I found is that Sony Vaio use this graphic card and in some forums, one say it covers 98% and in other 100% of Adobe color space which made me wonder what type of screen Vaio have.
- is MacBook Pro 17” good for photo editing?
- what % of AdobeRGB color space I might expect from it on my external screen or what % of sRGB colors space it delivers?
- Is it possible to calibrate Mac’s native screen and external one, use both at the time and have different profiles on each?
- Tell me anything that would stop me thinking about MBP for photo editing?
Thank you for your time reading this and hope to find the answers here.

You should consider posting your questions in the Pro Application section for Aperture. You will bump into more photographers there than you will here. But I will make an attempt at answers:
whats about Adobe color space?
No, the MBP screen will not encompass the Adobe Color Space. In fact, few desktop monitors are capable of this.
does the native MBP screen display full color range the video card is able to produce...
There really is no limit to the color extremes, which define a color space, as established by a graphics card. So your question is not a well formed question. An old ATI Rage card with 8-bit output would reveal the same color gamut as would the NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M connected to the same display. The gamut is determined by the attached display, not the graphics card.
...or connecting external monitor to it’s mini display port would bring much wider color range to my eyes?
Yes, certainly the potential for that exists. Notebook screens are usually a compromise and can't be expected to compete with a high-end desktop display in many categories, including color gamut. But whether it would bring a "much wider color range to" your eyes is hard to say. It depends on what type of external display is in use.

For P.O.D. Printing: How to Set Adobe RGB Color Space

Hello and thanks in advance,
(I'm using InDesign CS 5.5 on a Mac.)
I need to set the proper PDF export settings
For printing a book on demand, with color drawings inside on the text pages.
The onnly instructions that I have been able to find, say this:
"Submit your graphics in the Adobe RGB color space, withprofile embedded."
The Big Question: How do I do that ?
I know enough to start with
File --> Adobe PDF Presets --> Press Quality
Then I click on the "Output Menu"
and here's where I start to get lost.
for
Color Conversion ...
I think I should select "Convert to Destination"
for
Destination
I think it should be "Adobe RGB (1998)"
Now in order to embed this profile,
What should I select under:
Profile Inclusion Policy ?
And is there anything else I should be doing to get these inside color images printing nicely ?
Thanks again,
IthacaAuthor (aka ZorbaTheGeek, but the forum would not let me log in with my old screen name)

Virtually all digital printing is done via either PostScript or PDF. In the former case, the PDF is converted to PostScript viat use of Acrobat and in the latter case, the PDF is sent directly to the digital printer.
In either case, CMYK is in fact the actual destination color space. There are no real RGB printers!!! What is true is that non-PostScript / non-PDF printers (typically low end laser and inkjet printers as well as specialized inkjet and dye sublimation photo printers) do take in RGB via drivers and convert that to CMYK, but I don't believe that is what you are dealing with.
Our recommendation at Adobe for best printing results, whether for offset or digital printing, is to export PDF as PDF/X-4 with no color conversion using the default CMYK color space (SWOP CMYK) or if instructed otherwise by your print service provider, one of the other CMYK color spaces provided by Adobe or by the print service provider themselves. FWIW, most on-demand digital print devices do have settings to fully emulate SWOP CMYK printing conditions. Using PDF/X-4 in this manner allows the existing color content in your InDesign document to be properly tagged in the output PDF file and converted to CMYK at the digital printing device's RIP.
(It might also assist us if you can provide a pointer to the explicit instructions provided by your print service provider.)
- Dov

15-inch have the same high adobe rgb gamut as 17-inch?

Just wondering if the 15-inch has the same high adobe RGB color gamut as the 17-inch (think it is like 90% of the gamut or something like for the 17-inch). Thanks in advance! This is the Only thing keeping me from purchasing the 15-inch right now.

Actually, it all depends upon your needs, as you see them. While it’s true that ‘many, many’ professional photographers use the 15” UMBP, a great many do not. And, of those that <do>, many cannot afford the investment, don’t wish to acknowledge there’s even a possibility that a difference exists (I’ve seen this in studios many times- it’s known to some of the staff and creative heads for whom I’ve consulted as ‘17” envy’.)... Then there’s the flat-out ignorance of the difference, and, lastly, the least-common reason- “... I know the difference, need the difference, but I’m going to settle for ‘adequate’...”. Not common if the Pro’s needs are more than average. The ‘ballpark’ is sometimes not good enough- if it often needs to be a certain part of the outfield, then the 17” UMBP’s screen, the best laptop solution is the next step up from the 15” UMBP. The realistic expectations of a pro photographer, who needs more than the display accuracy of the 15”UMBP, there IS an alternative. And if it raises productivity, and/or the quality of your final product, the 17” display’s broader color gamut is immediately worth it as an investment going forward; after a certain period, the 17” becomes cheaper, not more expensive to use, by saving editing time on the 23”, for example, when the workflow can be more ‘localized’ to left field, rather than Wrigley Field ;^). I use the 15” UMBPs all the time- but for color-critical work, where time is money and my 30” ACDs are far away for the day, I need MORE than the 17” UMBP can provide, so all the hardware ability I can get is a requirement, not an alternative. An example: I had to batch-process over 600 NEFs from my D3X several weeks back... I had both a 15” and a 17” at my disposal, the 15” calibrated to its color space limit, a just-barely Adobe RGB 1998, w/ 500GB 7200 rpm drive, 6GB RAM, Capture One Pro, NX2, LR2, Aperture, Bibble, RAW Developer, CS4, etc..., same software on my 17”, but 8GB RAM, a calibrated ProPhoto color space, bigger screen, 2.93 Ghz processor, and no power to either for the afternoon. Both batteries were fully charged, and I had an extra battery for my 15”, also fully charged. I knew I could batch-process all 600 NEFs on the 17”, and still have about 35-45 minutes of surf/e-mail time after batch-processing. I also knew that, if I grabbed the 15” for the job, I’d have to batch-process WAY differently, since I’d have to ‘strip’ each NEF of its ICC tag (for Adobe RGB 1998), because, if I batched into CS4 or Aperture or Capture One Pro, for example, with any of those programs on the 15”’s ‘maxed’ ICC calibrated color space of Adobe RGB 1998, I’d never regain the lost gamut from any of the 15”’s batched files, because, well.. it’d be gone. With the 17”, calibrated to ProPhoto RGB, I’d be able to bring ALL the gamut from ALL my batched files into CS4 one of my office office Mac Pros (32GB, 8-core, 12 TB RAID, yada yada), and have a leg up on the next day, when some of these batched files would be fed the output ICC tag of ProPhoto RGB to print on an Epson 9800 for proofs that could hang on a gallery wall, which is exactly where my client wanted to be able to hang HER NEF files, after the full process she wanted to implement at her studio, beginning with a Nikon + laptop, next stop, ProPhotoRGB files being fully massaged on a pair of 24” ACDs (LED), then some of these being incorporated into very high-end HD video loops edited in FCP. ProPhoto RGB is the ONLY color space that photo files have a chance in that kind of application, as with so many other pro applications/scenarios; Adobe RGB 1998 may be NTSC-safe, but would be dwarfed by the video gamut, given the type of output monitors being used...
all right, so many, many scenarios are far more mundane, but obviously still ‘professional’ in nature.. I’m illustrating my point with a high-end flashlight so that the spectrum is clear- in so many professional photo, video, layout and graphical, even architectural applications/situations, the 8GB, broadest-gamut capable, big-real-estate, 133 dpi screen rez (AMAZINGLY helpful when editing/viewing fine detail/tonal gradations), and even the 2.93 Ghz chip (I save about 20 minutes a day, by my estimation, with the difference in clock speed alone, for some of the transcoding and Shake-related projects I do), amount to a significant increase in both utility and ‘easy-breathing’ performance- it’s easier to hit the bulleye when your equipment’s not breathing too hard, straining at its limits!
OTOH, if the above sounds like WAY further out to sea than you normally venture, get the smaller, more maneuverable craft. But if you need a rig that gets you between islands as fast and as accurately as possible, the big dog’s your rig. To strain the metaphor a <little> further, it sounds as if you might need the bigger boat, eventually, and RAW files in CS3 go WAY more accurately and speedily on the 17” UMBP- I’d get the blue-water rig, because you never know when you’ll get a job that changes your needs for good- to the bigger! ;^)
Best,
Charlie

Color profile (sRGB Vs. Adobe RGB)

Hello,
As I am struggling with choosing the 'right' color profile for my photo's (either sRGB or Adobe RGB) I was wondering what your opinion of this subject is. I have searched the internet for the information about this subject, but the forums/answers/information couldn't give me enough satisfaction.
For editing photo's I am using Adobe Photoshop, for my library I use iPhoto. Some photo's are uploaded to sites as www.facebook.com. Sometimes I order a photo book via iPhoto.
Because there are pros and cons for both sRGB and Adobe RGB I am not sure which profile I have to choose. I would like to choose one format, since this will standardize my library.
Looking forward to your opinion.
Best Regards,
Jelle

Larry & Terence,
Did you do any on-screen testing or proofing? All modern browsers support ICC profiles and should show improvement with Adobe RGB in certain color ranges (NOT just Facebook).
Apple products aren't "designed" for sRGB. sRGB is a standard developed by Hewlett Packard and Microsoft (and I think we all can agree those aren't Apples best friends). sRGB is the default for most Cameras and SmartPhones, that doesn't mean it's the best.
Most monitors sold in the last 5 years have wider gamut support than the sRGB.
Article "Can the entire sRGB color gamut be displayed on today's LCD monitors?"
http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/srgb-bad-working-space-profile.html
"sRGB was created to match the display characteristics of consumer-grade CRT monitors manufactured in the1990s." "LCDs use a completely different technology to make colors..." "All wide gamut monitors by definition can show more greens, yellows, and cyans than sRGB."
Apple even suggests "Adobe RGB offers a wider gamut than sRGB, and is usually a better choice, if available." in this article:
http://support.apple.com/kb/ht2026
iPhoto 6 and newer have support for ColorSync profiles, older versions may not work with Adobe RGB and could cause the color to look worse. If a profile isn't present, or isn't supported iPhoto assigns Camera RGB. Complaints about "dark" color from iPhoto are more than 5 years old.

IPhoto 5 and Adobe RGB - RGB 1998

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for