Unprocessed JPEG output from PS2 looks different to DPP/RSE???

M

Mr_Sukebe

Suspended / Banned
Messages
393
Edit My Images
Yes
I'm hoping that someone can help.
Here's a photo that I've run through PS2, DPP and Raw Shooter Essentials (RSE):

PS2 version:
cs2IMG_5624.jpg


DPP version:
DPPIMG_5624.jpg


RSE version:
IMG_5624-01.jpg


I've not done any processing using the applications. So can anyone please tell me why the PS2 version looks rather blanched in comparison?
I'm assuming that one of my settings in PS2 is not correct.
Any thoughts?
 
Two of your shots have sRGB colour space but the PS one comes up colour space un-calibrated, so that something I'd check.

At the end of the day DPP will ALWAYS make a better job of converting a Canon raw file than any Adobe product will.
 
whiteflyer said:
Two of your shots have sRGB colour space but the PS one comes up colour space un-calibrated, so that something I'd check.

At the end of the day DPP will ALWAYS make a better job of converting a Canon raw file than any Adobe product will.
Click to expand...

My deepest thanks for that.
Your comments lead onto a good hours read around on the subject of aRGB vs sRGB.
I'm hoping that you can sanity check my thoughts. From what I can see:
- On opening a RAW file in PS2, at that point PS2 asks what colour space I wish to use, with options including sRGB and aRGB. If I select sRGB at that point, the resultant files certainly don't have that washed out look
- I couldn't find another option with PS2 to allow my workspace to use aRGB, before then using sRGB as part of the export process into JPEG, is that correct?
- When outputting to JPEG, I seem to need to use 8 bit and not 16bit. Is that a limitation of JPEG?
- I've just bought a new monitor and intend to buy something to calibrate it with. Lets assume that I'll have that in place in a little while. If I then produce a JPG file (using sRGB) for printing by say a commercial company, do I need to worry about colours, or is it then down to how well the printer is calibrated?

Apologies for the number of questions, but this is a fairly new area for me that I was not that aware of previously.
 
You seem to have things sussed out. Yes use sRGB . Its a reasonable standard, and most print houses tend to use this as a colour space anyway. In fact the majority of normal printing devices tend to work around this anyway. I wouldn't suggest you start using Adobe RGB unless you really have a good reason to do so.

As far as I am aware you can only save JPEG in 8 bit. To be honest if you are using sRGB I can't see any advantage in saving it in anything else. However if you are doing significant amount of PP work then working in 16 bit (TIFF or PSD) may be an advantage. Convert to 8 bit for saving.

Calibrating you monitor is always a good idea, especially if you are sending work out for printing. I recently had some images printed by Togs Print, and the prints matched what I had seen on my screen.
 
Again my thanks. I did try using aRGB as a workspace with a conversion to sRGB prior to conversion to JPEG. That didn't seem to work quite as planned, so I think I'll stick with sRGB all the way through. From the linked articles, I get the impression that it's not quite as good as aRGB, but that negatives are probably not that huge for an amateur like myself.
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
I get the impression that it's not quite as good as aRGB, but that negatives are probably not that huge for an amateur like myself.
Click to expand...

It's a common mistake to think that sRGB isn't as good as AdobeRGB, in fact larger colour spaces don't give you more colours, they just squeeze more saturation in to the same number of colours. If your image doesn't need the extra saturation and/or the output device can't display/print it then you gain nothing but lose tonality - even if you do gain the extra satuation you still lose the tonality.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top