• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Color space conversion accuracy — summary

Color space conversion accuracy — summary

October 18, 2014 JimK Leave a Comment

Unless something comes up, I’m done with the color space conversion accuracy work. I’ll use this post to summarize what I’ve found over the last couple of weeks and link to the posts with the details.

The first conclusion is that, using 16-bit precision, for all colors within the gamut of both the source and destination color space (two restrictions that apply throughout this post), conversion among model-based RGB color spaces can be performed with accuracy much greater than the quantization errors involved in converting to 16-bit or 16-bit unsigned integer representation after the conversion. This is also true between RGB color spaces and CIElab and CIELuv.

The second finding is that the ACE color engine that ships with Photoshop and other Adobe image editing programs, while not as exact as doing the color conversion calculations in double precision floating point, is sufficiently accurate to make conversions among RGB color spaces and from those spaces to and from Lab color (CIELuv is not supported by Photoshop) safe for photographers wishing to take advantage of some quality of any of these color spaces.

The round trip from say Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB is occasionally attractive to gain advantage of moves that are difficult to impossible in RGB, but convenient in Lab. If you’ve been scared to do this because of vague fears about damaging your image, set those fears aside.

The third discovery is that the Microsoft ICM color engine is not as accurate for these conversions as ACE, and should be avoided.

One caveat that applies to the situation where not all colors in the image are within the gamut of the target space is that the ACE engine as accessed from Photoshop doesn’t allow perceptual rendering intent, just relative colorimetric, which maps out of gamut colors to the gamut envelope. Photoshop does allow you to select absolute colorimetric, but when ACE is doing the work, it silently substitutes relative colorimetric for that choice.

The Last Word

← On dynamic range — a guest post In search of a read noise ugliness metric →

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • JimK on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • Štěpán Kaňa on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Štěpán Kaňa on How Sensor Noise Scales with Exposure Time
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • JimK on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Geofrey on Calculating reach for wildlife photography
  • Javier Sanchez on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?
  • Mike MacDonald on Your photograph looks like a painting?

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.