Exporting Tiff-16 Prophoto vs Tiff 16 from X2D

[pflower]

Normally I export X2d 3fff files as Tiff 16, but recently I tried the preset of Tiff-16 Prophoto.  The Prophoto Tiffs are about 300MB whereas the Tiff 16 files are 600MB.  What is going on?  Anyone got an explanation - I had thought from reading various threads that Prophoto Tiffs had a larger colour space than Hasselblad RGB but if both are 16 bit Tiffs why the size difference?

Any thoughts?

[pflower]

OK, my mistake.  The preset of Tiff-16 Prophoto was one that I set up and didn't specify a 16 bit space.  So my mistake.  But still I would ask is Prophoto 16 bit Tiff going to make much of a difference to the Hasselblad standard 16 bit Tiff in Hasselblad RGB colour space?

[fh29]

The Hasselblad webinar below gives some valuable info, when they discuss the colour space options

You can see Hasselblad rgb is contained within Adobe 98, so it doesn't make much sense to export in Prophoto if your working colour space is the standard Hasselblad rgb.
If you like to edit in Hasselblad L*rgb and its wider space then it could prove useful.

[JCM-Photos]

a false assumption of many people is that the bigger the color space, the bigger the quantity of information.
That's not how it works

Quantity of information is only function of "bit depth" (here 16 bit) and "number of pixel"
This mean that the bigger the "color space" the bigger also the distance between two adjacent shades.

For 16 bit It has no practical negative impact on image quality because you have really an astronomic number of possible shades.

This is not true with JPEG's limited to 8bit (256 times less shades than 16bit).
It's a total nonsense creating Profoto JPEG's with big gaps between adjacent shades.

Files Weight difference of the same 16bit TIFF files can come from file compression
LZW compression is common and some software does it per default.
( with compression it also comes from the real number of shades content, some software can create empty bits going from 8 to 16 bit).

Hasselblad 50c sensor cameras create 16bit files from a 14bit sensor, but there a no empty bits in the 16bit file as there is a mathematical bits interpolation between sensor bits that emulates nicely a true 16 bit sensor

[JCM-Photos]

The Hasselblad webinar below gives some valuable info, when they discuss the colour space options

You can see Hasselblad rgb is contained within Adobe 98, so it doesn't make much sense to export in Prophoto if your working colour space is the standard Hasselblad rgb.
If you like to edit in Hasselblad L*rgb and its wider space then it could prove useful.

It make sense to export 16 bit TIFF's in Hasselblad L* RGB, do all the rest of you editing in this space (photoshop, topaz...) and only convert down to Adobe RGB just before printing the TIFF or in S'RGB just before exporting JPEG's for screen display.
That's how I work

[tenmangu81]

Agree. But take care that some printers have larger colour space than Adobe RGB for some locations/colours. The best would be to edit your images in Hasselblad L* RGB and let your software print them after having selected your printer/inks/paper profile in its printing window.

[JCM-Photos]

For me the question is, is it better ot worse:

loosing some minimal color space when printing Adobe RGB on certain printers, but having full manual control of the conversion from Hasselblad L* RGB to Adobe RGB in Photoshop or Affinity (desaturation of non printable parts) ?
or
let an automatic printing process convert much more different colors spaces from Hasselblad L* RGB to printer gammut ?

I don't have any documented clue
In this case my feeling goes rather to manual control

[tenmangu81]

With soft-proofing in Photoshop or Affinity, you keep a full view of desaturation, non printable parts, paper colour, etc... when choosing printing from the Photoshop window.
But YMMV !