I just noticed something that has me a little rattled. Crestock requires that images submitted be in sRGB format. Every other stock site that I submit to (from what I can recall) requires RGB format. The only site that I could verify this on was DT (couldn't find it at other places).

Are they not seeing the same colors that we are?

I only submit in RGB - have you guys noticed this as making a difference in approvals and rejections at any of the sites you submit to?

I wasn't sure of the right answer for this one, I new sRGB should be used when working for websites.

So I looked it up..

I found a good article explaining the In's out outs here

http://www.earthboundlight.com/photo...gb-debate.html

Hope it's useful

Doug

Thanks Doug - me thinks i may be onto something...this paragraph stood out...

"As a corollary, to represent any given color, one would use lower numbers in Adobe RGB than in sRGB. You'd have to, since you'd need to reserve the really high numbers for those colors that are in Adobe RGB but lie beyond the gamut of sRGB. What this ends up meaning is that if one takes a file full of Adobe RGB data and mistakenly displays it as if it were sRGB, it would look somewhat unsaturated and washed out. Those lower Adobe RGB numbers represent more washed out colors when misinterpreted as sRGB."

I convert my RAW files from sRGB to RGB when going into Photoshop. Makes me wonder what other people are seeing when they are reviewing my images. I'll have to read and re-read the article (probably a few times).

Great Stuff!

You been getting alot of rejections lately ?? :?: :?: :?:



good job you checked or you would have packed it all in!


Doug

I have my monitor profiled at sRGB and PS, and my camera is set on sRGB.

There is a lot of conflicting data on this - I've read numerous books and talked to a lot of printers - none of them seem to be able to agree.

Totally photos upload function displays the image in sRGB but it's converted to RGB for display. I found out at TP because I uploaded a photo of a white swan which I know was done with my old camera in RGB and when it came up for keywording/categorizing the highlights were all blown, which I thought was weird, because it doesn't have blown highlights, so I deleted it from the queue and then asked about it. I'll look to see if I've still got their anser

The colour space can make a big difference to the viewer. I specifically asked that question at Crestock because many of the images displayed on "todays best" have a lot of blown highlights.

The simplest solution is to duplicate your file before you begin or before you assign/change the colour space. Some weird things can happen to the colour if convert back and forth

Most of my old files are in RGB, my more recent (stock) in sRGB because I'm finding more places are starting to use this. My print files remain in RGB because that's what the printer wants.

I've only run across one print company that doesn't want rgb - they want CMYK.

__________________
Photography of Grace
Feature Pics
Photography Blography

Getting less rejections these days than when I started but microstock has screwed up the way I look at images! I've got a lot of shots on my hard drive that I haven't uploaded because I felt the color was "too flat" or the focus was not sharp enough. I tend to be a lot more pickier about what I upload these days so I've had a lot of throw aways in the past month or so. This may be the reason!

I especially noticed this towards the beginning of January and I've felt that I've been in a slump lateley - I've been trying all kinds of different things. I thought it was a depth of field issue - not; thought the sensor needed to be cleaned - not; changed the parameter settings in the camera a bunch of times. This makes sense.

Gracey, my process is shoot in RAW, convert to TIF, clone out stuff, process the TIF in Neat Image and save the output as a JPEG for final upload. I actually have three copies of everything I've ever submitted! Time to go back to those RAW files I didn't think were acceptable and play a little bit.

I agree - when I shoot in raw I have a similar work flow to yours, but I almost never use Neat Image anymore. I work in sRGB because the camera profile is set to that. When I was using the D70 I generally used RawShooter Essentials - could do almost all of my processing in that. The thing that's nice about it is you can do it one way, save the 'conversion', change your mind and save another conversion and it doesn't overwrite the first one - you've got both converted files one with the suffix .01 the .02 an so on. Very nice.

The other was more for people who shoot in jpg, which unforunately i am limited to right now (nobody has a raw converter for the D200 except Nikon, and it takes way tooooo long just to open the file). I'll be back in the raw mode as soon as RSE comes out with a conversion for the D200.

__________________
Photography of Grace
Feature Pics
Photography Blography