2.41
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
|
Hi all, I have been thinking about starting to print my astrophotography images in the near future, but I am complexed as to how to best get Adobe RGB in PixInsight. I know how to change the working colour space in the PixInsight settings, but how would I be able to define the colour space before stacking in WBPP? If I changed the settings to Adobe RGB, would the images then come out as Adobe RGB? If that does the trick, would I have to go back and re-run my data through WBPP, or would I be able to change the colour spaces of the stacked files? According to my research if you shoot RAW, it doesn't matter what colour space you choose in-camera but it does matter if you are shooting JPG. I am not too sure how this works with dedicated astrophotography cameras though, but I assume that this also applies for them too. Zak  |
|
2.41
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Never mind, I've figured it out. I'm just re-integrating my registered files again and saving them as Adobe RGB instead of SRGB. Zak |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| How does that process work? Do you also have to edit the image on a monitor that's displaying Adobe RGB to make sure the colors are accurate, save ad Adobe RGB, then send those files to a place that prints in Adobe RGB? |
|
2.41
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Space City Astro: All I did was go into profile management in PixInsight’ Edit menu and changed the default profile from SRGB to Adobe RGB. Usually after I edit in PixInsight, I import the photo into Photoshop or Lightroom and do the final touchups, then save the image in two versions: one in SRGB for the internet and Adobe RGB for printing.m I’m also using a calibrated BenQ monitor that has a 99% Adobe RGB colour gamut. Some other monitors also have a similar Adobe RGB gamut albeit slightly lower than my BenQ monitor. I have heard some printing places don’t use Adobe RGB for some reason. I don’t know why, but if you don’t have a monitor with a wide Adobe RGB gamut, then SRGB will do fine, but make sure the monitor you use is calibrated. Hope this answers your question. Zak 🙂 |
|
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| Thanks for the info. I also have a BenQ calibrated monitor and I'm hoping to print soon as well, but I've run across a few places whose colors look different than what I export. |
|
2.41
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Space City Astro: All good! Yes I know, it’s very tricky to get the results that you are after. My suggestion would be to find out what the printer ICC profile is for their printers they use and install it so then you can get a pre-visualisation of what the print will look like as represented on the monitor. Zak 🙂 |
0.90
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
Hi everyone, I have been printing astronomical images for a few years and I use the online service saal digital which offers the possibility of being able to print in various types and with various ICC profiles. from what I know, saving the photo in sRGB Jpeg is used for the web, while saving the photo in adobe RGB is useful for printing because it maintains a greater dynamic range, I will send you the screen of my settings. Consider that I have the monitor calibrated so in the first icon I see spyder X  in 'rendering intent ' i don't know if relative colorimetric is the correct way...any suggestion? I think it's a very complex topic Riccardo |
|
2.41
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Riccardo Civati: Thanks for your insights Riccardo, really appreciate it! You are right in regard to colour spaces. SRGB is mainly used for the web where colours don't really matter, but Adobe RGB has a wider colour gamut which is more desirable for printing. In your box where the "New Monitor Profile" is, all I did was check the "Detect Monitor Profile" and now whenever I re-calibrate my monitor, PixInsight will automatically update the monitor display profile, which is handy, although I have changed from SRGB to Adobe RGB, and it is a remarkable difference in the colours that are displayed as I am re-stacking my data and saving the stacked images as Adobe RGB instead of SRGB. I haven't really touched the setting that you have asked about to be honest, I've just left it as it is. Zak |
|
0.90
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
|
the only thing I can tell you is that if you photograph with an astronomical camera (as in my case), the raw files that come out do not have an embedded profile. creating the master from single lights with or without profile, nothing changes. once you have your final image ready to be printed you can change your profile (as in Warren Keller's book Inside Pixinsight)  |
|
2.41
#...
·
|
|---|
Riccardo Civati: Thanks again for your valuable insights, really appreciate it! Good to know this stuff for sure. I did end up stacking some data taken with my ZWO ASI183MC Pro yesterday of M20 and NGC 371. I was able to assign the Adobe RGB profile to them without any issues. I am not planning to switch to mono imaging anytime soon, but I am more than happy with my ZWO ASI183MC Pro and ZWO ASI533MC Pro cameras. Zak 🙂 |
|
0.90
#...
·
|
|---|
|
anyway, i raccomand you to print your astro pictures in gallery print gloss, because with this type ensure contrast in the image. I saw photo in gallery print matt and lose in contrast.... you can try both |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Very good thread. As far as relative vs photometric, there is really no best setting. It depends on the image and how you want the printer to handle colours that are outside of gamut for your printer. Relative colorimetric changes all the colours out of gamut to the nearest colour in gamut. So,many colours change to the same one. It DOES NOT change colours in gamut. Perceptual changes ALL the colours in the image in a proportional way so that they lie in the printer gamut. I do almost all of my printing with Lightroom and I like to soft-proof with both rendering intents to see which I prefer. Most of the time, I use Photometric. |
|
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
| This is why I would like my own photo printer one day - can proof my own work as I go! |
|
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I love having my own printer, but they do not like to sit for long periods unused otherwise they get clogged and use a lot of ink going through cleaning cycles. I print for other people, so it helps. I make sure that I print something at least weekly. also, printer ink has to be the most expensive commodity on earth! |
1.43
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| I've had good results from MPIX giclee prints on semi gloss. I tried matte before as well but as others have said the image loses something. Using adobe RGB with a calibrated monitor and the printed colors were very accurate. |
0.00
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
| Use Adobe 1998 which has the greatest color space then in Photoshop convert it to CMYK with the profile for printing FOGRA39 2004 and you're ready to go |
0.00
#...
·
|
|---|
|
Thanks for posting this thread. I plan to be be printing soon and I have an idea where to start now. |
0.90
#...
·
·
2
likes
|
|---|
Observatório Astrográfico do Boqueirão: I confirm: I'm taking several pictures to large printouts, for an exhibition, to a professional printing service - this is exactly what they asked for (CMYK, FOGRA39). In Photoshop, you can select this profile in the View > Proof Setup > Custom, select Coated Fogra39 (see below), then...  ...select the 2 following menu options:  you'll be surprised how this changes the color renditions... I had to increase contrast substantially to get darks/blacks really as they should be! Hope this helps. Rodolphe |
|
2.41
#...
·
·
1
like
|
|---|
Rodolphe Goldsztejn:Observatório Astrográfico do Boqueirão: Hi Rodolphe, Thanks for your additional information, really appreciate it! I will have to have a go with the settings that you have provided and see if I can get something out of it! I have heard that once people receive the correct printer profile, they have had to significantly alter their images to get it to where it was before. Also, apologies for the delay in my response, I had to finish my studies late last month and thankfully I passed, so now I can focus on getting some much needed rest and astrophotography weather permitting! Zak |
