Thanks for your clarifications, Wolfgang.
Yeah, I did wonder about that (hence my qualification).
John
+1 to @John-M’s comments, especially #2 and #3.
If you never print your images, or only ever print ‘snaps’ (6x4 inches or at most 7x5 inches), then a workflow that is centred on the sRGB colour space will be adequate. It follows that a monitor that covers ALL of the sRGB colour space is essential and not all ‘sRGB’ monitors actually cover 100% of the sRGB colour space.
To get good prints though then a monitor capable of displaying close to all of the Adobe RGB colour space will help you immensely. Such monitors are not cheap though. At the top end are the Eizo CG (and marginally cheaper CS) Series. Less pricey are the BenQ SW series. Of course, “Other brands are available” 
I have a (now quite old) Dell.
Regardless of which monitor you buy (sRGB or Adode RGB compliant), it will need calibrating and profiling.
So, for my appreciation of your workflow - do you;
- Initially process for your monitor’s AdobeRGB color-space - - and then, secondly, switch to sRGB and adjust accordingly, in preparation for exporting to an sRGB display target … and/or Soft Proof for your intended printer profile
OR
- Do you skip the first step and have SP activated at all times - in preparation for rendering to display and/or printer profiles.
Essentially, I guess, I’m trying to understand the “value” of having a better-then-sRGB monitor … Perhaps it’s (as you noted above) because;
to be in control, when printing from an inkjet printer, that covers more than sRGB colour space, one needs an equivalent monitor, avoiding hit or miss
Is that it ??
John
To put it blunt – for snaps, memories and ‘simple’ pics you are good to go with sRGB, right from the beginning. And the same thing when sharing pics on social media.
Note, I’m NOT degrading those photos! It is like watching pics on any device. The captured scene / moment is interesting, but nobody cares for colour space …
- My goal are fine prints and so far (before PL6) I’ve worked in AdobeRGB colour space*) exclusively.
- Preparing photobooks for the printing provider I then have to convert to sRGB.
In both cases I use softproof & adjust, which finally is also possible since PL6 WG / CL.
- When sending out pics to friends and family, I convert the pics to sRGB
(if necessary also with SP …).
*)
I used to be on (calibrated) sRGB screens. But when I started printing seriously, I never got the colours right until I decided for a better monitor. And from then on I really could make use of softproof and paper profiles without hit or miss.
1 Like
At the risk of butting in…
My (Dell) monitor automatically switches to Adobe RGB mode whenever I’m running a photo editing application and for those photo editing applications (Canon’s DPP, Affinity Photo v1 & v2, and PS CS2) that allow a choice of working space, I’ve set them to work in Adobe RGB. For PL, I only have PL 5, so I have no choice, it uses Adobe RGB. Thus I do all my processing in Adobe RGB colour space.
When it come to printing, I have a mid-range (6 inks) Epson and (so far) I’ve only used Epson papers. I never print from PL (or DPP). My final, for print, file is a 16 bit TIFF with an embedded Adobe RGB profile that I soft-proof in AFP or PS, having set the soft-proof options to match the paper and rendering intent set in the print dialog. I don’t know the printer’s gamut but what I get out of it is a good match to what I see on screen.
When I next upgrade PL (probably when PL 7 comes out) I hope the only change I need to make to my PL workflow will be to:
- work in PL’s wide gamut colour space
- and then, because that colour space is proprietary and DxO don’t seem likely to allow file export with a matching ICC profile (and without such an ICC profile no other application can understand, and so render, the colours correctly), exporting with an embedded ProPhoto ICC profile
However, if I find that when PL is in it’s new wide gamut mode it does not seamlessly colour manage its proprietary wide gamut down to Adobe RGB, so that the colours I see on my monitor are as good as it gets, i.e. if the only way that PL in it’s wide gamut mode correctly colour manages the data I see on screen is if I have to manually invoke some sort of ‘monitor soft-proof’, then I think that will be where PL and I part company and I switch to a workflow that uses AFP from beginning to end.
Thanks for all this lovely advice. My current monitor is an Asus VG289Q which is a hundred percent sRGB and with its four weekly calibrations with a ColourMonkey photo. There never seems to be any difference between the calibrated version and the default version.
My printer is also calibrated to aRGB, an Epsom XP 1500.
I only ever take pictures for myself and those that I like get printed and then put in a frame to be hung on the wall. In my film days, which were mostly black and white. They were usually mounted on mounting boards.
Like you @Wolfgang I find it very hard to get the printed colours correct. That is why I have been thinking about an aRGB monitor.
It seems that your monitor is still available Wolfgang That is within my price range, but the other one you suggested. I cannot justify. Not for the amount of photography that I do nowadays. At the age of 84 and having to use a mobility scooter.
I am also looking at a ViewSonic VP2785-4K which gives me 3840x2160, the same as my Asus monitor and only 1 inch smaller.
I don’t know how @Joanna gets on with her prophotoRGB printer in getting the colours right in relationship to to her monitor.
Thanks for all the very valuable advice. I hope I’m not the only one that has benefited by it.
2 Likes
Keith, you, John and others have done valuable work in this thread concerning colour management in PL6. However the thread is now quite old and anyone wanting information has to wade through a lot of stuff that is no longer relevant. A new thread covering V6.3 forward, starting with what we know now, would benefit the community particularly given that print soft-proofing is now available?
1 Like
There is no printer that can reproduce the gamut of the ProPhoto colour space. As far as I know @Joanna has a high end / professional level Canon printer that can reproduce most of, and perhaps for some colours beyond, the gamut of the Adobe RGB colour space.
@stuck:
DxO did a backwards compatible loop with Legacy.
So they “run” two pipelines from raw to monitor preview.
What gives a problem: colorshift from " older developed in adobeRGB(legacy) rawfiles to Wide Gamut.
Because of “clipped and compressed colors” by PSC module whats gone is gone principle.
BUT in my eye’s if you open a rawfile in DxOplv6.3 with a PLV5 dopfile those colors arn’t “gone” they are only compressed due the AdobeRGB workcolorspace settings used in v5
So idealy they could calculate a “preset” correction of all color effecting settings and tools.
like create a Virtual Copy transfer all corrections of PLv5’s dopfile then overlay the “adobeRGB towards Wide Gamut saus” preset inorder to mimic the AdobeRGB look inside the Wide Gamut working colorspace.
Then they can discard old legacy colorpipeline i think as choice.
My problem of understanding is in colorspaces can you put the fence in a pasture smaller than the maximum area?
In other words can i use AdobeRGB clipping warnings/ histogram calculations inside a Wide Gamut colorspace?
Like a continues Softproofing but then with the full color aray they use with clipping warning and displaying in histogram.
Then you work always in WG and set “continues sofproofing” on P3 or AdobeRGB or any other colorspace you like to edit to.
I wouldn’t like to guess at the gamut of my Canon PRO-1000 but, with 12 inks it should be good.
To repeat, I use an Apple P3 gamut monitor, which I have profiled and the Canon printer, which is also profiled. This means that what I see on screen is what I get on paper, which is why I have never bothered soft proofing, since the printer is matched to the screen.
1 Like
An AdobeRGB/P3 monitor that I really recommend is the BenQ SW270C. It comes with good factory calibration, too, and it’s not exceedingly expensive. Not 4K, though… The 4K version is the SW271C… and it IS expensive.
I have to ask the question: why do you export to ProPhoto when PL5 only works in AdobeRGB (much smaller gamut) then print to a printer which I am pretty confident nowhere near reaches the ProPhoto gamut?
I would export to AdobeRGB as that is as good as it will get in PL5. It makes more sense if using PL6.
I suppose it is force of habit from Photoshop.
- It is a larger colour space so I stand less chance of problems in subsequent processing in other software (like Topaz Photo AI)
- Since PL6 now uses a larger gamut, it is a consistent workflow to continue so to do
Of course, I could be talking through my hat but - I have never had problems printing before so I just keep on doing what I know works 
1 Like
Great work.
Perhaps add PL version to the topic on the image for better history reference.
Agree here. I never used Photoshop (so no old habits here), but I do use that same Canon Pro1000. My screen is Eizo CG2700s. I do know that exporting for print in ProPhoto give noticeable better results than exporting in AdobeRGB.
Working in DXO Wide Gamut and exporting in ProPhoto RGB for print gives best results here.
Wow! that is interesting. Thank you so much. You just saved me a few sheets of paper and some expensive ink 
Of course, I am also in the situation that I seem to be producing B&W more than colour, so I am using Canon’s amazing B&W mode. I have a small exhibition of Jazz photos, all printed borderless B&W on A2 Canson Baryta Photographique II paper and mounted on 5mm foamboard. I have been, to put it mildly, gobsmacked at the beauty of these prints, even though I made them. Compared with my previous Epson SC-P600, is like night and day. Yes, the inks are horrendously expensive when compared with with the Epson but, so far, it has been worth every penny.
Do you use the Canon professional Print & Layout software?
Good to read that you like your prints from the Pro1000 (I can hardly imagine otherwise)! Same here…absolutely fantastic results (both monochrome and colour). I like them so much, that I do not care about those ink prices (and compared to my regular document printer they are even more affordable; ink content vs price). I only use Hahnemühle papers (Photo Rag/Photo Rag Baryta/ Museum Etching and Bamboo); in A4 and A2 sizes.
I use QimageOne (only for printing), and I like it very much! User interface/capabilities/sharpening algorithms/etc. all very good. Also support is really fast and very helpful.
Side note: DXO Wide Gamut can be set as working colour space. Not for export. I wonder if this will ever happen and what (print)results would be. For this moment I’ ll stick to ProPhoto RGB
Fair enough reasons, thanks Joanna 
