Usage of wide gamut for editing

[Watangka]

Hello, I am new here and I hope it's the right place for my topic!

I will try to keep it as short as possible.

Basically, I want to know what exactly adobeRGB gets used for and if a wide gamut monitor is necessary in my case. 

Currently I am trying to understand a former ebook about colormanagement and what went wrong on my picture. I recently bought a wide gamut monitor (SW240) and thought all my problems will be solved. Or that I'll at least improve my workflow. 

Shortly about my current setup: My monitor (BenQ SW240) is paired with my windows11 PC and profiled to its native colourspace with a SpyderX Pro. I shoot RAWs with my camera and edit them in Camera Raw/Photoshop. 

I have this picture of a pit viper and I want to edit it. In Photoshop and camera raw, I used AdobeRGB as my working space and made my changes so the image appeals to me. Now I export it as a JPG and convert it to sRGB to be able to upload it to IG. 
-> The picture looks terribly unsaturated. 
As of this, I started to question the whole CMM topic again and I think, I basically understand what went wrong. 
I believe this picture uses more highly saturated colours that only get visible with a wide gamut monitor and after converting it to sRGB it looses these colors as they will be cut after sRGB maximum saturation of (255/0/0) for example. 
Now I am quite confused about basically two things. 

First of all, why is the sRGB picture looking exactly like the AdobeRGB file on my monitor but not on my phone? Shouldn't the picture look less saturated on my monitor after converting it to sRGB and looking at it within colormanaged software? If I use a softproof in photoshop for sRGB it looks desaturated like it does on my phone. I converted it while exporting via photoshop and I have both options activated (Convert to sRGB - embed colour profile).

And the second topic:

What exactly does adobeRGB gets used for? I understood that it is a wider gamut that includes a lot of printing and monitor colours. But why would I use it as a working space? As long as my monitor supports wide gamut colours I will be able to see printing colours, so why wouldn't I use the printers profile as a working space to only see the colours that can be represented within this profile instead of editing in adobeRGB and converting afterwards? Wouldn't I get the same result as it was with my pit viper picture, while the cyan colours are shown correctly but the greens (for example) will be more saturated within my adobeRGB edit but can't be respresented on my print, resulting in creating more problems again?

Also, is adobeRGB useful for digital media in any case other than being shown on wide gamut monitors? As far as I understand this, if I edit on a wide gamut monitor with adobeRGB as my working space and I'll look at the result on a different wide gamut monitor it will basically look the same if both monitors are calibrated correctly. But as soon as a sRGB device joins it will look different and less saturated. This makes editing one master file and converting to sRGB obsolete as I'll have to edit twice again if I want control over my pictures, meaning one edit for wide gamut monitors and one edit for sRGB devices (and one edit for prints if I want to). Am I correct?

So once again, are there any scenarios where it's useful to use adobeRGB as a working space? It seems to me that, while having the possibility to look at the colours of the full adobeRGB gamut it will always be limited to smaller working spaces to gain more control over the end result. 

And now the ultimate question: Isn't it quite unnecessary to buy a wide gamut monitor if you're not printing by yourself? I can see it being useful for looking at the colour profile of the printer on your monitor and edit within this colourspace but if that happens so rarely, isn't it enough to buy a good sRGB monitor that will be able to show ~80% of adobeRGB to have at least some kind of control but will provide other advantages such as resolution and size? 
It seems to me that every photographer now needs to use an Eizo wide gamut monitor. At least everyone recommended to get one but I can't find any advantages if it's not about certain printing techniques. 

It's a lot to ask and I'm very grateful to everyone taking the time and reading this. Maybe someone can help me or provide me some sources to read into these topics as I'm not only in trouble but also quite interested in CMM.

 

[Derek Cross]

Many on the forum will disagree with me, but I suggest you stick to sRGB until you're more knowledgeable about colour management. For most purposes near enough (say 80% accuracy is good enough and using a profile will help.
Most people viewing an online image won't have calibrated monitor and when printing via CMYK you lose about a third of the colours. If you're printing to an inkjet printer that's CMYK Plus, print from an sRGB fike and let the printer's software do the conversion.

[Watangka]

Thanks for your answer!

Yes but that's exactly what I try to do, getting more knowledge about CMM and I am currently stuck a bit and I don't really know how to find answers and open up these blockades in my head.

So I am looking for more understanding instead of "what to do". I hope this doesn't sound rude as I am very thankful for you taking your time answering my questions!

[Derek Cross]

There are a number of colour management experts on this forum and no doubt they will be responding in due course. You may find they disagree amongst themselves as it can sometimes appear a complex issue. I gave you the "easy reading edition"!

[Watangka]

Yes, thank you. I basically understand your answer as for using sRGB. It fits to my "target audience" and I will probably be fine using it for my master files. I want to keep my RAWs nevertheless, so if I need a more special edit I am able to just do it. Appreciated your answers!

[Derek Cross]

Most monitors can't display Adobe RGB that's one reason I suggest keeping to sRGB.
Always keep your original pics and PSD layered files so you are able to work on them again if needed.  
Save copies as uncompressed JPGs for printing and other uses. Some recommend saving as TIFs, but IMO, the difference in quality is imperceptible, the file size is large and you have to convert then to JPG for use on the web etc anyway.

[Bob_Hallam]

Adobe RGB is for print and display, where the print gamut is larger than sRGB.  For most commercial ink jet prints Adobe RGB is the better choice, for sheetfed Offset (CRPC6 and CRPC7) print gamuts are larger than sRGB in places.  So Adobe RGB is used for those processes.  If you are shooting Raw and you never want a great metal print or high-gamut wall art and Instagram is your media, then sRGB is the right move, but for many if not most photographers, they produce work for multiple media streams. So export to Adobe RGB then transform a separate file set for internet use.  

Those are your choices.  For me having an Adobe RGB display was cost-effective and future-proofed my workflow

[Per Berntsen]

I have this picture of a pit viper and I want to edit it. In Photoshop and camera raw, I used AdobeRGB as my working space and made my changes so the image appeals to me. Now I export it as a JPG and convert it to sRGB to be able to upload it to IG. 

The working space is only used for files created inside PS (File > New), and for untagged images (that don't have an embedded profile). PS will open files using the embedded profile, unless you have made changes in the color settings.

Make sure that Color management policies is set to Preserve embedded profiles.

Raw files don't have a color profile, so in the Camera Raw workflow settings you set the profile you want for the new, rendered file that will open in PS.

First of all, why is the sRGB picture looking exactly like the AdobeRGB file on my monitor but not on my phone? Shouldn't the picture look less saturated on my monitor after converting it to sRGB and looking at it within colormanaged software? If I use a softproof in photoshop for sRGB it looks desaturated like it does on my phone. I converted it while exporting via photoshop and I have both options activated (Convert to sRGB - embed colour profile).

Color management is broken in the Export dialog, causing the preview to display exactly like the original, even if it contains colors outside the sRGB gamut.

So are you referring to the preview, or are you opening the exported image in PS?

What exactly does adobeRGB gets used for? I understood that it is a wider gamut that includes a lot of printing and monitor colours. But why would I use it as a working space? As long as my monitor supports wide gamut colours I will be able to see printing colours, so why wouldn't I use the printers profile as a working space to only see the colours that can be represented within this profile instead of editing in adobeRGB and converting afterwards? Wouldn't I get the same result as it was with my pit viper picture, while the cyan colours are shown correctly but the greens (for example) will be more saturated within my adobeRGB edit but can't be respresented on my print, resulting in creating more problems again?

Changing your working space to the printing profile would have no effect, because PS preserves the embedded profile (with the proper color settings). And do not convert your files to the printing profile, leave them in Adobe RGB and soft proof with the printing profile. You should always use standard profiles like Adobe RGB or sRGB for your files.

Most commercial printing services want files in sRGB, but many inkjet photo printers have a color gamut that can match Adobe RGB. You might at some point decide to do your own printing,  so leave your files in Adobe RGB.

I have wide gamut monitor, and I get excellent colors from files in Adobe RGB on my inkjet printer.

For reference, here's a screenshot of my PS color settings.

[D Fosse]

Yes, Per gave you the long answer that I didn't have time to do yesterday 🙂

The short answer is that a wide gamut monitor is necessary for accurate soft-proofing for print - whether inkjet or offset. The monitor gamut needs to be large enough to cover all the colors you get in print. And with a wide gamut monitor, it is.

There is much talk about the overall gamut size, but it's not all about that. The main thing is that going from RGB to CMYK, the primaries shift 60°. So to fully cover a CMYK color space that is much smaller in volume, the RGB space needs to be much larger to cover the C, M and Y primary colors. It's a large triangle circumscribing a much smaller one that is rotated.

And one more thing: gamut clipping isn't really about "losing" colors. You'll lose them in any case and there's nothing you can do about that. It's about the quality of color in the clipped areas. Clipped color has a dense, opaque and visually unpleasant look. All texture disappears. It doesn't "breathe". That's the main reason you want to avoid clipping.

There is just one basic precaution with wide gamut monitors. You need full color management at all times. You absolutely need to have a calibrator. If an application doesn't support full color management, you can't use it. You need to find another that does.