Thanks for that Stephen, the only time I looked on there it seemed I had to sign up before reading posts, maybe I didn't try hard enough :) Not being a birder it seemed pointless taking it any further.

Thanks for that Stephen I wasn't sure whether it could be read or not. I didn't want to do a copy and paste there was too much information and it still hasn't all sunk in. It would be good if Nigel Blake replies here as well.

No problem, I think in future when Stephen and I post in the same thread I am be known as 'Nikon Fox Bob' - as per Don Hoey (Dont ask!) :D

Another thing to consider here is if your are "Assigning" a colour space or "Converting" to a colour space.

The assign just embeds a profile or changes a header tag in the file. It does not touch the image data so profiles can be changed with no ill effect.

Convert does affect the image data.

when I open up images in Elements 2.0,the colour noted is RGB*.So is this SRGB or ARGB.i have been into colour settings/management and the only options are 1-no colour management
2-Limited colour management-optimised for Web Graphics
3-Full colour management-optimised for printing.
I think 1 is the default setting but I am using setting 3.
One of the reasons I ask,I want to send some wedding pics for a friend to Photobox,and obviously if the settings are not compatible then she will not get the best from her photos.I did send a couple of my own digiscoped ones to be printed in A3 size,they seemed okay,so is my setting the same as one of the ones mentioned please,if so which one.

Sorry to dig this old thread up again, but I've been doing a bit more research to try and get my head around this and colour management in general.

Am I right in thinking that the in-camera colour space setting, sRGB or AdobeRGB, only affects the colours output if you are shooting in-camera jpegs (or whatever other 'standard' formats your camera produces)? If you are shooting in raw format, does the output file contain the whole native colour space of the camera?

A bit of reading on the Phase One support forums suggests that this may be the case. If anyone else has any evidence for or against this assumption please let me know. It would seem to make sense that the whole possible colour gamut that can be produced by the camera would be output in the raw file.

Duncan

Duncan will this answer your question, I am just reading it all myself.
http://www.adobe.com/designcenter/di...shoot_raw.html

Thanks Christine,

It does look like the in-camera colour space setting is only applied to in-camera jpegs and the full range of the sensor output isn't clipped/compressed accordingly when shooting raw. Useful link, thanks.

Duncan

Do you know why you would want to change the profile using the Assign command?

I cannot see an obvious reason, though I suppose it could be useful if disk space is at a premium, and there are huge numbers of small images. Save the image without the profile. Then attach the profile after opening the image at a later date.

Although 'Convert' does change the image data, it does not change the image. It merely changes the representation of the image. (That is not quite true as there will be a tiny change due to limits in the accuracy of the colour space and bit depth, and conversion errors due to rounding.) So if you convert from Adobe RGB to sRGB, the image should look the same before and after assuming a viewer that recognises profiles and that the entire image lies within the sRGB gamut. Of course the image data does change, so opening each image in a viewer that does not recognise colour space profiles will give different results.

I believe that is true for Nikon RAW. The selected colour space is just a tag, which can be changed in Nikon Capture. As you say, RAW contains the whole native colour space of the camera. It is the same for sharpening. You can change the 'in-camera' sharpening in NC