Can we have a /p/rotip general?
I notice that almost all pics posted here by beginners have uncalibrated colour spaces.
This should be the first thing people do when they edit and export their photos via Photoshop, Gimp or what ever editing software you work it.
In Photoshop go to; Edit -> Color Settings
From there, you should convert or set your working colour profile to sRGB for posting shit on the internet (as most people don't have access to 10bit monitors).
Also this is the default colour space for 99% of consumer printers. Change it to sRGB unless you specifically need greater colour information.
>>2765991
Noob here. What difference does it make?
>>2766087
Color depth, the Internet has limited amount of color range that can produced. The Internet runs on sRGB and wouldnt be able to replicate the richer color scheme of Adobe RGB; which would lead inaccurate colors in photos
>>2766087
If you leave it uncalibrated or set it higher than sRGB then you will be missing WHOLE colour palettes when you publish it on the internet.
Say you take a picture of the Rainbow, instead of a vibrant range of colours, certain bits of the every hue will be missing leading it to becoming dull and just pure ugly.
This seems counter intuitive (since sRGB has a lower bitrate than say Adobe RGB) but it's because 99% of consumer software and printers simply cannot process all that extra colour and display them.
>>2765990
Homes, if you're going to give advice, give the full story or don't. Fucking with color spaces and just doing it in one place for one specific thing without regard to any considerations is idiotic and can be problematic.
You only want to use sRGB for files that are intended for web display. Wider gamut color spaces are appropriate for printing or if you're sure that your images will be displayed on wider gamut displays.
Downside of wider gamuts is in unmanaged programs, you can have some seriously fucked up display problems, but this is less and less of a problem these days.
If you actually want to learn enough about this shit to make your own informed decisions instead of just being told to do one thing without any kind of consideration of your specific situation google up something along the lines of "how to color management" and you can avoid idiocy like "the internet has a limited amount of color range that can be produced"
>>2766165
>"the internet has a limited amount of color range that can be produced"
OP here, I didn't post that shit. And fuck you nigger for assuming so.
all that bait in here .. must .. resist ..
>>2766170
How the fuck is this bait? Explain.
>>2766169
I didn't assume you did, but you allowed that kind of retardation to be posted by not posting the full story. You should have at least fucking linked a decent article on the subject.
This thread is glorious, so much superficial knowledge cramped into so few posts, good work. I not even saying you guys try to bait anyone here, I genuinely think you don't know any better.
>>2765990
Do you know how to do it with capture one?
>>2766618
Never mind i figured it out kinda. This is what i found. Which one should i use?
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Photographer Danny Incognito Image-Specific Properties:
>>2766619
PNG sRGB
Don't use slow shutter speeds! They make the picture blurry!
[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties: Equipment Make Canon Camera Model Canon PowerShot SD1300 IS Maximum Lens Aperture f/3.2 Sensing Method One-Chip Color Area Image-Specific Properties: Horizontal Resolution 240 dpi Vertical Resolution 240 dpi Image Created 2010:11:07 22:18:45 Exposure Time 1 sec F-Number f/3.2 ISO Speed Rating 80 Lens Aperture f/3.2 Exposure Bias 0.7 EV Subject Distance 0.08 m Metering Mode Pattern Flash No Flash, Compulsory Focal Length 6.01 mm Rendering Normal Exposure Mode Manual White Balance Manual Scene Capture Type Standard
>>2766670
captain obvious strikes again
>>2766673
captain obvious strikes again xD
base iso has less dr than other isos. best iso is two stops above base for both noise and dr.
>>2766683
Is this true?
>>2766684
No.
>>2766684
yes, mein nigger. Test it
>>2766687
>test it
how does the average photography enthusiast test minute 2% differences in the dynamic range of their cameras?
>>2766693
It's like 400%. Use your eyes, dumbass
>>2765990
>This entire fucking thread
Wew lads
>>2766683
base iso =/= lowest iso on your camera.
the true base iso usually has the highest DR. your camera's "L" iso setting is an expansion, simulated mode, not the base iso.
>>2767060
On canon sensors, ISO 160 has very very very very slightly better performance than ISO 100. It is in no way noticeable in everyday usage, and should be entirely ignored by anyone actually taking photos as a photographer. This is NOT the case, however, with more modern ISO Invariant sensors from Sony, used by Sony, Nikon, Pentax, Fuji, etc.
ITT : The Dunning Kruger Effect.
