Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
adobe RGB, for iMac-27?
- Thread starter clager
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
No chance. The gamut of an LCD screen is limited by the emitted spectrum of the backlight. This is a design thing. There is no way how to change that from software.
First off I'm a tog, a pretty decent one too if I do say so myself, so I know a fair bit on this subject.
Secondly I think you're gonna need to do a LOT of reading on colorspaces; what they are and how they're used. Judging by your post you're just starting out in digital photography. I would suggest getting a calibration device such as a Spyder 3 pro and use that to accurately calibrate your monitor so that it displays true colours.
Without this any pictures you edit on any computer will be drastically different from anything you send to print. (printer calibration is a whole other beast however) Also for editing I suggest either using pro photo colorspace or sRGB, never AdobeRGB unless your printers specifically ask for your files of be in aRGB (a lot of print studios don't use aRGB on account of its "awkward" gamut.)
The monitor will display any color you want it to but it must be calibrated to do so. Every monitor is different and no two monitors will be able to use the same color profile and accurately display colors. The 27" iMac has one of the best types of display made at the moment so for photographers its perfect, one just has to know how to use it.
I recommend you read through http://www.digital-photography-school.com/ forums and tutorials on the subject so you can get stop worrying about this and start enjoying you hobby.
Secondly I think you're gonna need to do a LOT of reading on colorspaces; what they are and how they're used. Judging by your post you're just starting out in digital photography. I would suggest getting a calibration device such as a Spyder 3 pro and use that to accurately calibrate your monitor so that it displays true colours.
Without this any pictures you edit on any computer will be drastically different from anything you send to print. (printer calibration is a whole other beast however) Also for editing I suggest either using pro photo colorspace or sRGB, never AdobeRGB unless your printers specifically ask for your files of be in aRGB (a lot of print studios don't use aRGB on account of its "awkward" gamut.)
The monitor will display any color you want it to but it must be calibrated to do so. Every monitor is different and no two monitors will be able to use the same color profile and accurately display colors. The 27" iMac has one of the best types of display made at the moment so for photographers its perfect, one just has to know how to use it.
I recommend you read through http://www.digital-photography-school.com/ forums and tutorials on the subject so you can get stop worrying about this and start enjoying you hobby.
Well, Ive been an advertising photographer for over 20 years, Im a member of Getty since 15 years, Ive got my own business since 20 years, Im a diamond member of Istock, Ive had 8 exhibitions at the Hamilton gallery in London, SO! I think we can safetly say Im not a beginner in digital photography, using HD3, Hasselblads and D3X cams and god knows what.
However, I did calibrate with the x-rite, colormunki and sure enough its spot-on from monitor to print, no problem at all.
Thing is, the actual calibration is one thing but the Apple engineer told me its still showing in between srgb and adobe-rgb, which has got nothing to do with the actual calibration itself.
An srgb image will look very differant from an adobe-rgb image.
it might be that youre right actually, the actual calibration itself might just be it.
best.
I tend to disagree with that.
The true is that the iMacs monitor is decent compared to common standard. Especially when you have a good sample (many iMacs have various display issues). It is probably more than sufficient for amateur photography editing, etc. However, there are definitely better displays on the market for more demanding usage (like pre-press). The biggest price/quality tradeoff seems to be that there are just white LED backlight. It is still better than standard CCFL backlight, but significantly inferior to state-of-art RGB LED backlight used in professional displays.
This is something that can't be solved by calibration. The fact is that according to measures iMacs LCD can display roughly 70-73% of AdobeRGB gamut. The best in class LCDs can display even wider gamut than AdobeRGB (110% or more).
Calibration is just a way of telling the application what can your LCD display so that it can show more accurate colors. It doesn't help your LCD to show any new colors.
Yep! youre right here. I also work with Eizo monitors, they can display a far wider gaumont then adobe-rgb but thats not all the time beneficial since it can easily fool the eyes.
The imac-27 screen however is good and if I compare large A3 size prints, post-processed on both these screens, well, its hardly any differance at all.
That is kind of limiting advice especially considering you thought you were talking to a noob. While pro is a great colorspace, last time I check non of your major browsers supported it so if you plan on uploading them to your own site or flickr type service it will not display right. While pro color is better stick with sRGB.
Agree, Prophoto is a great space although sometimes considered too wide. My trouble is, I supply lots of Stock-photography and all these Agencies including Getty are geared towards the Adobe-rgb space, i.e. their entire workflow is adobe-rgb. monitor, printer, camera, the lot, adobe-rgb for printing and srgb for webb shots.
Having said this, the colormunki calibration probably got me as close to this workspace as possible.
best.