Currently, many Canon cameras have a 14bit raw image, and the colour space is larger than srgb or argb in most cases. This allows you to alter 'exposure', etc., in editing your raw files. Depending on what you want to do with your images, I see little point in throwing away 6 bits of information right from the start by working in an 8 bit colour space. Prophoto has a wide gamut colour space, beyond what your eye, monitor or printer can display, and it can lead to unexpected results in the final image, but being 16 bit, it generally allows more manipulation in smooth toned area, without the visible banding that can occur if working on 8 bit images, usually most noticeable in sky and skin tones. However, every time you change to a different colour space in your work-flow you will lose information, and you can't recover that by changing back, in fact it will lose you more. So, I think the best solution is to work in 16 bit, and if your printer has a 16 bit driver, then use that. It may be that at the moment the actual print head can not lay down 16 bits worth of different shades, and it may be that you can't see the difference between the result and if you print in 8 bit, but in a few years time the hardware will be capable (but probably your eyesight will be worse
) and it will be you that will be making the choices, not relying on a general purpose conversion algorithm.
You can, of course, avoid these decisions if you shoot in jpeg, or stick with 8 bits throughout - but it depends on the purpose of your images, time, storage space, etc. if that is a good solution for you.
I can remember the excitement caused by vga colour monitors, in a world of green or amber, (and before that when computers never had a vdu, fwiw). It is a pity, that basically a simple problem is needlessly complicated, but that's the result of too many vested interests I guess
.
Best wishes,
Ray
Qimage registration expired? New lifetime licenses are only $59.99!
