Over saturated web colors & Wide Gamut monitors

I'm trying to create a new portfolio website but I'm going crazy with the colour saturation when viewing the site on my wide gamut monitors. Reds are horrendously over-saturated compared to my colour managed apps like Photoshop and even OS X Preview.
The website looks OK on the ipad mini and iPhone 4 and looks a little better on OS X 10.8, but on my main workstation (which uses 10.7.5) its horrible. I have a Dell U2711 IPS monitor which has a wide gammut, and all my web browsers (Safari, Firefox, Chrome) and the Finder of all things display my images super-saturated. Doing a Quick View in the Finder shows the image correctly but icon view is super saturated. Very odd.
Is there a way to fix this? I've tried stripping out the embedded sRGB profile from the web images but I get the same when I preview the image in a browser. Choosing Proof>Monitor Colour in Photoshop gives the same oversaturated result.
I use Xrite Colormunki for screen callibration.

I'm using the Spider Pro to calibrate my monitor and everything looks great in Photoshop, Illustrator and Firefox 3.5 with color management turned on. But the lack of color management in Fireworks is still a problem because I'm not seeing the colors the way they will look on most people's monitors. I can't design unless I can see what most people will be seeing.
Fireworks should be using that ICC profile that my calibrator generated but instead its sending the colors to the monitor raw. This is what's causing the over-saturation. This really is quite unacceptable.

Similar Messages

Problem: Color Management/Save for Web on Wide Gamut Monitor

Hi,
I've got a problem with color management - I thought I understood it, but it seems as if didn't. So I'm trying to kindly ask for help.
I'm printing, and also trying to save an image for Web.
My setup:
- Win 7, CS 5
- Calibrated Wide Gamut Monitor (eizo cg223w)
- Photoshop set to ProPhoto (I don't want to start a discussion adobergb vs prophoto)
- Save for Web and Devices, Embed Color Profile, Convert to SRGB
- Viewing in Firefox 3.6 with Color Management enabled
Problem:
Image: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/311345/luchs-1024.jpg
If I compare the file in Firefox and Photoshop, the Firefox presentation is slightly more saturated - and I have no idea why.
I thought it should work with the above workflow.
Here is a screenshot where you can clearly see a difference (Note: the additional over-saturation here is caused by the wide gammut monitor when taking screenshots, in reality its not as dramatic as that): http://imgur.com/MFPbU but you can clearly see the difference.
I would be very very thankful for any pointers what I'm doing wrong in my workflow!
Thanks in advance,
Christoph

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
ch_bla wrote:
- Monitor calibrated
- Edit under ProPhoto RGB, 16 bit raw files
- Save for Web and Devices, Embed Color Profile, Convert to SRGB
Is this the preferred way?
It's a reasonable and correct way to do it, assuming you want to embed a profile in the images.
Since at least in some browsers and cases the colors selected within the HTML elements must match image colors, one can sometimes make a case for not embedding any profile at all, but that's really looking backwards. Browsers are moving forward toward not only managing colors in images but also in the HTML elements themselves. If you want your images accurately portrayed in as many places as possible you're doing the right thing looking forward.
Personally I embed the sRGB profile in my web images, as you are doing. And I check things primarily with IE and Safari.
Unlike you, I prefer to edit using the sRGB color space, but that's just personal preference. I find it more convenient to use File - Save As instead of File - Save For Web & Devices, and I get caught by gotchas less often this way. Your preference ensures you don't lose any colors at the extremes of the gamut while editing and it could easily be argued that that's better, depending on what image products you produce.
As for the article you mentioned, anyone who would set their preferred working space to Monitor RGB or use Proof Colors in normal editing is asking for trouble, and may not understand color management at all.
-Noel

Calibrating a wide gamut monitor

I've just installed a new Dell 2408WFP wide gamut monitor and will be using it with PS photo editing. I plan to purchase an Xrite i1Display2 for calibrating this monitor. I'm a bit confused by some postings in other forums about whether a WG monitor can be properly calibrated by this (and similar) colorimeters. I figure you guys would know. What say?
Jerry

I have the same monitor. There is no problem calibrating these monitors. What is a problem (to some) however is the fact that many Windows applications are not colour managed.
The monitor you have approximates the gamut of AdobeRGB. If you display an sRGB tagged image in a non-colour managed app the image will appear over saturated on a wide gamut monitor. For all your critical colour work you need to use
b fully
colour managed applications. Many of the free and popular image viewers on Windows are either entirely colour ignorant or only partially manage colours.

Wide gamut monitor

I have an iMac and a wide gamut monitor hook up to it.
I used the new xrite i1 profiler to profile the monitor. When I use the QA function, the wide gamut monitor never get good delta E (over 5 up to 11) under 10.6. the iMac monitor gets good result (under 2). I get good result with Windows 7 and 10.5. with the wide gamut monitor (delta E under 2). Has anyone experienced this???? I get the same result no matter what setting I use. (version 2 vs 4, matrix vs table, etc)
Thanks.

I have the same monitor. There is no problem calibrating these monitors. What is a problem (to some) however is the fact that many Windows applications are not colour managed.
The monitor you have approximates the gamut of AdobeRGB. If you display an sRGB tagged image in a non-colour managed app the image will appear over saturated on a wide gamut monitor. For all your critical colour work you need to use
b fully
colour managed applications. Many of the free and popular image viewers on Windows are either entirely colour ignorant or only partially manage colours.

Correct export color space for wide gamut monitors.

Running a photography studio I have 4 typical scenarios of how clients or end users will see my photo work. I create and edit the photos using LR 3 on a HP 2475w (wide gamut) monitor. I'm aware that there are color shifts, but trying to figure out which export color space to use to be most consistent.
A) Wide Gamut monitor using color managed software or browser such as Firefox.
B) Wide Gamut monitor NOT using color managed software such as IE 8.
C) Standard monitor using color managed software or browser such as Firefox.
D) Standard monitor NOT using color managed software such as IE 8.
A) gives the best results and that's what I run myself. No matter the color space that I export (sRGB, aRGB, or my custom calibrated ICC) the images appear to be correct 100%
B) gives mixed results...the hosting site for my photos seems to oversaturate a bit when I view the photos in their preview size which is what my clients see, when I view the original photo in full resolution (this feature disabled for my clients to avoid them downloading full rez copies of images), then the images appears a bit dull (70%). When I try this same scenario using aRGB export, it looks better (90-95%). When I export it using my monitor profile then the photo is spot on 100% however my monitor profile shows the photo incorrectly when viewing it using the standard Windows Vista photo viewer, it appears lighter and less saturated which I guess I expect since it's not color managed.
C) On a standard monitor the photos all look the same regardless of color space export so long as I use a color managed browser such as Firefox.
D) This gives pretty much the same breakdown of results as scenario B above. At the moment, it appears that when I use my custom ICC profile which is the calibration of my monitor...I get the best web results.
However my custom ICC profile gives me the worst local results within my windows viewer and when my clients load the photos on their machines, no doubt they will look just as bad on theirs regardless of which monitor they use. So aRGB seems to be the best choice for output. Anyone else do this? It's significantly better when viewing in IE on both Wide Gamut and Standard LCD's when compared to sRGB.
I would guess that my typical client has a laptop with Windows and they will both view the photos locally and upload them on the web, so it needs to look as close to what it looks like when I'm processing it in LR and Photoshop as possible. I know that a lot of people ask questions about their photos being off because they don't understand that there's a shift between WG and non-WG monitors, but I get that there's a difference...question is which color space export has worked best for others.

I am saying that since images on the internet are with extremely few
exceptions targeted towards sRGB. It is extremely common for those images to
not contain ICC profiles even if they really are sRGB. If they do not
contain ICC profiles in the default mode in Firefox, Firefox (as well as
Safari btw, another color managed browser), will not convert to the monitor
profile but will send the image straight to the monitor. This means that on
a wide gamut display, the colors will look oversaturated. You've no doubt
seen this on your display, but perhaps you've gotten used to it. If you
enable the "1" color management mode, Firefox will translate every image to
the monitor profile. This will make the colors on your display more
realistic and more predictable (since your monitor's very specific
properties no longer interfere and the image's colors are displayed as they
really are) for many sites including many photographic ones. This is most
important on a wide gamut display and not that big of a deal on a standard
monitor, which usually is closer to sRGB.
It seems you are suggesting that for a wide-gamut display it is better to
try using your own monitor's calibration profile on everything out there,
assuming on images posted with a wider gamat it will get you more color
range while there would be nothing lost for images posted in sRGB.
Indeed. The point of color management is to make the specific
characteristics of your monitor not a factor anymore and to make sure that
you see the correct color as described in the working space (almost always
sRGB on the web). This only breaks down when the color to be displayed is
outside of the monitor's gamut. In that case the color will typically get
clipped to the monitor's gamut. The other way around, if your original is in
sRGB and your monitor is closer to adobeRGB, the file's color space is
limiting. For your monitor, you want to make the system (Firefox in this
case) assume that untagged files are in sRGB as that is what the entire
world works in and translate those to the monitor profile. When you
encounter adobeRGB or wider files (extremely rare but does happen), it will
do the right thing and translate from that color space to the monitor
profile.
Wide gamut displays are great but you have to know what you are doing. For
almost everybody, even photographers a standard gamut monitor is often a
better choice. One thing is that you should not use unmanaged browsers on
wide gamut displays as your colors will be completely out of whack even on
calibrated monitors. This limits you to Firefox and Safari. Firefox has the
secret option to enable color management for every image. Safari doesn't
have this. There is one remaining problem, which is flash content on
websites. Flash does not color manage by default and a lot of flash content
will look very garish on your wide gamut display. This includes a lot of
photographer's websites.

Firefox 3.6 color management incorrect on wide-gamut monitors?

Hi,
I'm having a problem with sRGB JPEGs exported from Lightroom (2.7) that I don't actually think is LR's fault, but was wondering if anyone here has experienced this.
What I'm finding is that these sRGB JPEGs don't display correctly on my wide-gamut Dell 2408WFP monitor under Windows 7 in Firefox 3.6.9 or in the Windows image viewer. Now, this isn't the standard problem people used to complain about on wide-gamut monitors, where sRGB images came out looking oversaturated (pinkish) in FF because older versions of FF didn't do color management; the newer Firefox seems to be doing color management in general. The problem I'm seeing in my photos is that dark areas are becoming darker and losing detail, and midrange shadows are turning into a grayish green.
What's odd is that these JPEGs look fine in Safari on the same machine and the same monitor (and they also look fine if I load them into PS). That suggests to me that Firefox (and Windows) are doing something wrong, probably related to the fact that the monitor is wide-gamut.
Has anyone encountered this problem?
Thanks,
nj

Jim,
I think you are right in saying that it is a crap shoot. There are some interesting points in your post though.
The general public will be viewing with a monitor and browser that are not color managed. Won't my v4 images diplay fairly well under this situation (at least much better than with ff3.6 and a monitor with a v4 profile)?
That will work just fine indeed. It is arguable whether it will look "better". The variation between monitors is much larger than the benefit you gain from using v4. One thing that will work better is the out of sRGB gamut colors. You won't get the posterization using the v4 sRGB profile that you get with the v2 sRGB. For some images (think shots of flowers) that might be a major benefit. If all your colors are in sRGB that is obviously not a benefit at all. The big disadvantage of using v4 sRGB is that it adds quite a few extra kilobytes (about 60) to your image. For example, I just exported from Lightroom a simple web sized image at 1000 pixels long side at good quality and in v4 it was 262 kB, while in v2 sRGB it weighs in at only 209 kB. I see no real difference between these images on my wide-gamut monitor. This difference in filesize can be important and at smaller sizes is really going to matter.
What about a wide gamut monitor that's not color managed, running a browser that doesn't support v4?
The v4 sRGB image will look just as badly oversaturated as the normal sRGB one. Try it and you'll see. Perhaps slightly less oversaturated but the difference is very small in general. The one thing that you should realize of course is that if these users are running a non-managed browser on a wide gamut display, they are likely conditioned to oversaturated images and probably will never even notice. These users are lost anyway. It's best not to even try to target them. Target normal users who generally run unmanaged browsers on unmanaged sRGB-like displays. The variation between these displays is far larger than the slight advantage you get from using sRGB v4 and in my mind at least it is not worth the added size in the picture and the loss of color management in Firefox. Of course, you might have different priorities.
P.S. the numbers of users using unmanaged browsers are waning quite quickly if I am to believe my website's stats - IE is way down and both Safari and Firefox are up. Chrome (not managed) is coming up too but not as fast as IE is decreasing. Apparently (I haven't tried as I don't do windows) the latest IE does respect embedded color profiles, but alas it doesn't translate to the monitor profile. That is of course basically useless.

Screensaver off color with wide gamut monitor

I have a NEC SpectraView 241 calibrated wide gamut monitor and an older 15" AppleStudio monitor (also calibrated). The screensaver colors are OK on the AppleStudio monitor, but completely off on the wide gamut monitor, as if the software was not taking into account its color profile: greens and reds are too saturated.
As I can't find any post with a similar problem, I must be doing something wrong; but I can't see what!
Oh, and by the way, Photoshop or GraphicConverter photos are perfect on both screens...
Any idea?
MacOS 10.9.4
Early 2009 MacPro 2x2.26 GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon
20 GB RAM
NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512 MB

Finally fixed by modifying SpectraView Profiler Preferences to set the Profile in the system ColorSync Folder rather than the user ColorSync Folder...

Photoshop Color Settings for Wide Gamut Monitor

Hey guys,
I have a wide gamut monitor (HP LP2475w) which has already been calibrated. My question isn't so much about that, but the settings I should be using inside of Photoshop (CS5). As far as color settings (ctrl+shift+k) goes, what am I supposed to use? I have sRGB as the rgb working space right now. (never use CMYK), Gray % Spot = dot gain 20%, and preserve profiles are ticked on for all 3. Am I supposed to be using Adobe RGB in RGB working space to get the most out of my monitor? I'm asking because it would be embarrassing if I had a wide gamut monitor and am working within a sRGB color cap. Please enlighten me with the proper photoshop color settings, so that it works well across the board (browser compatibility, etc)
As a FYI, I am a professional digital artist who specialize in illustrations for print campaigns. So far from what I've seen, whatever's been printed out of what I produce from this monitor has come out pretty much looking the same, so I'm not worried about that. Again, I just want to make sure I'm not careless and am using settings which doesn't make use of a wide gamut monitor.
Thanks for your input in advance!

I think a lot of users believe that the Color Settings have much bigger role than what they actually do most of the time.
When working with images you have to be always aware about the color space the image is currently displayed in.
In Photoshop the displayed color space of an image is obtained in the following order of priority:
1. from the choice in View > Proof Setup menu when the View > Proof Colors is checked.
2. when the Proof Colors is off, from the embedded profile.
3. when the Proof Colors is off and when the image is without a color profile (untagged) from the Working Color space selected in the Color Settings.
This image shows how to check the color profile of an image - I keep it permanently on.
As you can see, the color spaces selected for working spaces in the Color settings affect the display of images only when they are untagged (without color profiles). The color settings also set the default choice of a color space when you create a new document but you can always select another color space form the Advance section of the dialog that appears when you choose File > New. You can also assign a color space to any image by using Edit > Assign Profile. So, if you never work with untagged images, you really don't need to care at all what your working spaces in your Color Settings are set to. You can use the Color Management Polices in the Color settings as a tool that will ask you what to do when you have profile mismatch when you paste. Personally I never use these because I'm always aware of the color space of the pasted content. Also the conversion method set in the Color Settings will be used when pasting. If you want different conversion method paste the content in a new document created with the color space of the clipboard content and then choose Edit > Convert to Profile and after that copy and paste in the desired document with the same color space.

Wide gamut monitors and prepping files for website

This question is for those who are colour management savvy and understand the issues with prepping sRGB profiled files for the web. I thought I was pretty good at this stuff, but found out I'm not as good as I thought....
Problem - prepping my images for my own website using a wide gamut monitor (NEC 2690 with SpectraView calibrating software).
Issue - when viewing said images after placing in website, on wide gamut monitor, reds are over saturated and colour not as it was in prepped file. My "other" monitor is a laptop screen (profiled, but still......). I do need to get an sRGB monitor (the NEC "regular" 24" or an Apple), but funds are tight right now.
I'm pretty sure all my workflow is good - profiled monitor (gamma 2.2), colour settings in Photoshop (I change over to n. American web/internet work space when prepping files for web), converting files to sRGB etc.
It's when I go to Save For Web.
I am embedding the ICC profile (for Safari and Firefox users), but when previewing the image in the browser (Safari) the image is as described above - over saturated in the reds etc. It looks the same after load onto my website and viewing in colour managed browser (Safari and Firefox).
Is this simply an issue of the wide gamut monitor "stretching" the available sRGB numbers to fit the (almost) aRGB space on the monitor?
Or is this something to do with the Monitor RGB (or is that the same thing......)????
Or am I missing something else???
any explanation of what is happening from a colour management point of view - and how best to deal with it - would be greatly appreciated. Also any books/articles/threads.
Thanks!
Oh yes, I'm using CS3.

I'm using the Spider Pro to calibrate my monitor and everything looks great in Photoshop, Illustrator and Firefox 3.5 with color management turned on. But the lack of color management in Fireworks is still a problem because I'm not seeing the colors the way they will look on most people's monitors. I can't design unless I can see what most people will be seeing.
Fireworks should be using that ICC profile that my calibrator generated but instead its sending the colors to the monitor raw. This is what's causing the over-saturation. This really is quite unacceptable.

Wide Gamut Monitors & 10.6 Default Monitor RGB

Hi, an Adobe employee just told me Snow Leopard 10.6x defaults untagged and unmanaged color, that SL "uses sRGB for untagged images/graphics, and converts to the profile for each display”.
I no longer have a WIDE GAMUT monitor to test myself.
Can a few people with wide gamut displays running 10.6x and Safari 5 please go to
www(dot).gballard.net/photoshop/srgbwidegamut.html
and roll over the tagged and untagged sRGB images at the top of the page.
And post back if they "match" to prove or disprove his statement?
(By his statement, the tagged and untagged rollovers should "match."
Also, if they shift, how does the untagged sRGB change in appearance?
Thanks (I am trying to get my page updated)...

That's expected, a wide gamut monitor will be a lot redder.
Yes. Just a lot more color range and gamut to view than a "standard" monitor.
Tagged) Photoshop/Safari is reading the embedded profile and CONVERTING to Monitor RGB.
Actually, that's what the OS or Photoshop always does. No matter what you're viewing in Photoshop, and no matter what the CMYK, RGB or grayscale working spaces are set at, the color you view is always your monitor profile, which is the last conversion done before displaying the image in Photoshop to the screen. Which is why I use my monitor profile as my working RGB space. I want my images to contain the color data of the device I'm viewing, not a canned space forced to fit. Here's what I mean. This image is Adobe RGB and my monitor profile overlaid. It's mostly a top down view. That was the best orientation I could turn the 3D map to for the example.
The ghosted map is the monitor space. As you can see, if I were to use Adobe RGB as my working space, I'd be losing all of the color I could be using that extends beyond Adobe RGB (reds through pinks, greens), since Adobe RGB would limit how far I could saturate those colors, as it has to stay within the limits of the profile. On the other side of the coin, the left side shows how much of Adobe RGB extends beyond my monitor space. The even brighter pinks through bright cyans across the top left.
But I don't care about that color. I already get all the saturation I can reasonably use for a photo. I mean, just how unnaturally bright do you want someone's lime green shirt to look? Using a color space your monitor can't display is also a very bad idea in my opinion. Say you're happy with the color you see on your current monitor. Then you get a new monitor at some point with an even wider color range. Suddenly, those bright pinks are way more saturated than you remember. What's wrong? Nothing. Your new monitor is just showing you values that were already in your Adobe RGB tagged image your previous monitor was incapable of displaying. I would much, much rather use my monitor profile for my RGB images. Then when I do move to any even wider range monitor, ColorSync/Photoshop will be able to properly map the color to fit the new monitor profile so the images look identical, or nearly so, as they did on the monitor I was using before.
In short, I consider canned profiles such as Adobe RGB, sRGB, ColorMatch RGB, etc. completely useless. None of them represent the device (monitor) in front of you. Only a properly created monitor profile is accurate to that device.
If the Adobe theory were true, you would NOT see a brighter, redder image on the rollover (they would "match").
Sorry, -g. By, So far, it sounds like his theory is true., I just meant that my tests were following his theory up to that point. After that though, it falls apart.
Can you tell me if Photoshop> Assign Profile (your custom EIZO monitor profile) displays like the Safari untagged rollover (especially level of saturated reds)?
Yes, but it looks that that to start with if I open the untagged image and tell PS to leave the color as is. So PS/ColorSync is already doing the only thing it can do with the color, mapping it to fit the monitor profile.

Over-saturation and color profile problems

Adobe Bridge CC color settings are set to North American General Purpose 2.
Adobe Photoshop CC is synced with Bridge for color management. PS working space is sRGB
The thumbnails and previews in Bridge match what opens in ACR and Photoshop. When I view the thumbnails in Win7 file explorer they are oversaturated. When I veiw them in web browsers they are oversatured and in some instances there is an intitial moment where they look one way, then the image transitions quickly to a more saturated version.
In Photoshop under View > Proof Setup it is set to sRGB. When I turn on Proof Colors I can see the oversaturation in Photoshop.
I am using a Spyder4 Pro to calibrate.
I have an Asus PA24 wide gamut monitor.
I see the same oversaturation on other consumer level (narrow gamut) computers and monitors.
I've seen similar threads and I apologize if this is repetitive. The other threads got so long and off topic that I couldn't find my specific solution in them. If you know of a thread that may help, please refer me to it. Or if you know the solution, that would be most helpful. Thank you.
Below is an example of Bridge and file explorer showing the same file differently. The Bridge view is what Photoshop is showing me too.

Steve Lenz wrote:
So my assumption is the monitors profile is not the same as the files tagged profile
My goodness, no. If they are, you get what's known as a null transform - IOW the whole color management chain is disabled.
Your document profile is what it is, sRGB, Adobe RGB etc. When that file is sent to the display, those RGB values are remapped into your monitor profile. Put in other terms, the doc profile is converted, on the fly, to the monitor profile. You need both, one is converted into the other.
When you run the Spyder software, it creates a profile and sets it as default monitor profile on OS level, where Photoshop finds it by itself. It also runs a general calibration, but that's not relevant here. Photoshop is only concerned with the profile, which is a description of the monitor's behavior in its current (calibrated) state. Just run the software and let it complete, don't do anything.
Just to get on to some firm ground here: Try to set Adobe RGB as default monitor profile in Control Panel > Color Management > Devices (reboot). Since this is a wide gamut monitor (it is - isn't it?), Adobe RGB is in the ballpark, and it's a known good profile. So that's roughly how it should look.

How to have posted images display as sRGB on wide-gamut monitors.

I understand an sRGB profile is necessary for posting images but I need help on how to do that with Photoshop CS2 and my new wide-gamut monitor (HP LP2475w with Spider3Express calibration). Before doing a "save for web" and posting, I "convert to profile" to either "sRGB IEEE61966-2.1" or "sRGB with hardware configuration derived from calibration" (it makes no difference which), but I see then a significant color shift in the posted images when I view them through Firefox 3.6 (with operating color management software -verified on other posted images) and the same color shift with IE6 (which has NO color management software). So, Firefox is NOT RECOGNIZING my posted images with the sRGB profiles that I thought I was embedding in them in Photoshop. So my question boils down to: WHAT EXACTLY DO I HAVE TO DO IN PHOTOSHOP SO FIREFOX WILL RECOGNIZE THE POSTED IMAGES AS sRGB and display them 'correctly' on wide-gamut monitors??
Thank you very much.
-Jeff

ISSUE RESOLVED. Photoshop CS2 was not embedding an sRGB profile in the images I was posting. I needed to check the "ICC Profile" checkbox in "save for web" to make that actually happen (after I did "convert to profile" sRGB).
I also have switched to "Full Color Management" Value 1 (hidden) in Firefox 3.6 so that Firefox now assumes any untagged image is sRGB standard and then converts those, and all other images which ARE tagged, to my calibrated monitor profile. This definitely looks to me like the way to operate with a wide-gamut monitor although I understand it is still recommended to always tag images for posting as sRGB and not embed any other profile for color consistency over color accuracy. At least if there are some out there with wider-gamut tags, I should get some benefit.
Have I got it right ?
Thanks,
Jeff

Help with colour profiles and wide gamut monitor

Hi there,
I know this issue must crop up a lot due to its confusing nature but I would really appreciate it if someone could explain what settings I should be using in Photoshop to get accurate colours. I had a look around and couldn't find any other discussions that answered this exactly.
My set up is a Dell 2408WFP monitor which is wide-gamut. I have calibrated this using a huey Pro calibrator (therefore have an accurate system colour profile). My photos are in Canon sRGB space, set by Digital Photo Professional (obviously easily changed if need be).
What I would like is to be able to preview what my photos will look like on a standard sRGB display. When I open a photo in Photoshop with all the settings on their default it looks extremely washed out, very low contrast and saturation. This is nothing like what the photos look like outside of Photoshop, and also not what the photos look like on other (normal gamut) displays. I have tried using the "proof colours" settings. When I have "proof setup" set to Internet Standard sRGB the colours look dreadful, oranges become blood-red, definitely not what I am getting when I view the image on a standard monitor. If I have it set to Monitor RGB then I get colours that look like my monitor outside of Photoshop -- this is the closest out of the three to the result I am actually getting on standard gamut displays. However I know it is not accurate because I know my monitor is wide gamut and therefore more has more contrast (and this is the case).
So what combination of photo colour space, proof colour space, and proof colours settings should I be using? My main priority is just the Joe Average using his TN panel monitor on facebook, I accept that on my monitor they will look slightly different. Settings for print don't concern me at the moment.
Thanks for the help. To anyone who will suggest that I read up on colour profiles... I have, and I understand them to an extent, but there are so many variables here that I am getting lost (monitor profile, photo profile, photoshop settings, DPP settings, faststone viewer's settings, browser's lack of awareness...)
Andrew

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}
thekrimsonchin wrote:
I know this issue must crop up a lot due to its confusing nature
You have no idea.
What I'm reading is that you want Photoshop, with its color management enabled, to display your sRGB photos as they would be seen on a true sRGB monitor - i.e., accurately.
Something to always keep in mind, when everything's set right and working properly: Your sRGB image displayed on your wide gamut monitor without color management (e.g., by Internet Explorer) will look bolder and brighter (more color-saturated) than the same image displayed in Photoshop with color-management. There is no getting around this, because the sRGB profile is not equivalent to the monitor profile. Do not expect them to look the same.
It's hard, without being there and seeing what you're seeing, to judge whether your sRGB images are undersaturated compared to what's seen on other monitors. I do know, as one with sRGB monitors myself, that images can look quite vibrant and alive in the sRGB color space.
What we can't know is whether your judgment that your color-managed sRGB images are undersaturated is correct in an absolute sense, or whether you're just feeling the difference between seeing them on your monitor in non-color-managed apps and Photoshop.
Photoshop normally does its color management like this: It combines the information from the color profile in your document with the color profile of the monitor, which it retrieves from a standard place in Windows, and creates a transform used to display the colors.
To have it do this you would NOT want the Proof Colors setting enabled. It is the default behavior.
-Noel
P.S., I don't recall whether DPP is color-managed, but you might consider using Photoshop's raw converter, which definitely shows color-managed output, per the settings I described above.
P.P.S., Your calibrator/profiler should have put the monitor profile in the proper place and set all the proper stuff up in Windows. Is it specifically listed as compatible with the version of Windows you're running?

Soft proofing problem with wide-gamut monitor

Hi,
I've just upgraded to a wide-gamut monitor (Dell U2713H).
I set the colour-space to adobe RGB when using Lightroom (I'm on LR5).
When I select soft proofing , my picture goes grey (that is, where I was displaying the photo in the border, then changes to a uniform grey within the proofing border). If I click on 'create proof copy' the picture then displays.
When the picture is grey and I move my mouse over the image, I can see the RGB% values change, as if there is an image there.
Previously, I had a (rather) low-end viewsonic and had no problems - Soft-Proofing worked fine. All I did was install the new monitor.
I'm running windows 7, nvidia 8800GT card, 8gb memory. No system changes prior/after changing the monitor.
Everything else on the monitor works fine (better than fine, actually, it is a great monitor)
Soft-proofing in photoshop (CS6) works fine, for what that is worth.
I'm a bit stumped. Can anyone help?
hans

1234ewqrd wrote:
I set the colour-space to adobe RGB when using Lightroom (I'm on LR5).
What do you mean by this? Are you selecting Adobe RGB as color profile for you rmonitor? Or are you talking about selecting Adobe RGB as softproofing color space in Lr?
The fact that your images are grey in Lr is a strong indication that your new monitor is not calibrated and is way off the chart. It might be brand new but that does not mean that its tonality and color display is correct for photo editing in Lr.
Calibration is done with a piece of hardware called a spectrometer and the accompanying software. Brand names are Spyder, ColorMunki, GretaghMacbeth. After calibration the software creates a profile that is used by the monitor.
You don't select any other profile than the profile created by calibration and profiling for photo editing - irrespective of which program you use for photo editing.
In the meantime - as a temporary remedy and until you get the calibration tools - you can set your monitor to sRGB. Be aware that sRGB is a much smaller color space than what you rmonitor is able to display; with sRGB you basically prevent the monitor from displaing wide gamut.
See here on how to set the monitor to sRGB:
http://members.lightroomqueen.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/1137/188/how-do-i- change-my-monitor-profile-to-check-whether-its-corrupted
http://forums.adobe.com/message/4977176#4977176
Everything else on the monitor works fine (better than fine, actually, it is a great monitor)
You have no way of telling if the monitor works fine, i.e. if the monitor has the correct intensity (brightness) and if it displays the colors correctly, i.e. as a true representation of the color numbers. Our brain automatically adjusts colors to what they ought to be. What we see is basically unreliable for photo editing. Only a calibrated monitor will display the colors correctly.
Also, when you calibrate select an intensity (brightness) of araound 110 cd/m2 - irrespective of what the software suggests. Often monitors are way to bright which results in prints that are too dark.

RAW output to an adobe rgb and srgb look identical in bridge but different in PS on wide gamut monitor.

Photoshop CS6. Wide gamut HP LP2475w monitor. Spider 3 Elite calibrated. Working space adobe rgb. When outputting a raw to Adobe RGB jpg it looks a bit whacked with color blotches/jumps in PS. The sRGB of it does not. BUT......in bridge they look identical. The adobe rgb jpg almost acts like viewing an image in a non-color aware browser on a wide gamut monitor. Like bridge shows it right but photoshop is showing it whacked out. I can't tell what is lying to me and if there is even a problem with the image. Here is a half second 2 frame gif alternating between the two from a screen cap. http://www.extremeinstability.com/hmm.gif Abrupt blotchy color changes with the adobe rgb when viewed in photoshop. And again, when you look at the two images in bridge they don't show that, they look identical.
Thanks,
Mike

I guess I now learned that Bridge only generates srgb previews. So I see them the same in there I guess. Looks like it comes down to the adobe space and jpg. Oddly enough an 8 bit adobe tiff covers it fine without breaking up. Can see the 3 on this gif. http://www.extremeinstability.com/3.gif

Over saturated web colors & Wide Gamut monitors

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for