Aperture/Photoshop Color Control Issues

I am photographer that has been doing the unthinkable for the past four years – I use the Finder to scroll through pictures I’ve taken and load them one-by-one into Photoshop CS4 for editing. I know this is dumb, and I really want to change my workflow. I’ve really like Aperture, but it has one fatal flaw (and one minor flaw) that is preventing me from using it. I desperately need help, as I estimate I need to review and edit 50,000+ images this year!
I’ll give you as best of a description of each problem and everything I can remember that I’ve tried. Note, that these issues replicate on three different Mac (all also clean installs), Mac OS 10.5 and 10.6, a PC, and the issue is the same with Lightroom 2 and 3 Beta, as well as Aperture 2 and 3. I must be doing something really dumb!
The Major Problem:
So I start off with a picture like this in Aperture (it may be useful to open images in multiple tabs):
http://img210.imageshack.us/img210/5585/28037816.png
So, I go to work making my adjustments to the RAW file (a NEF, since I shoot Nikon) and end up with something like this:
http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/3703/43700549.png
Now I right click on the picture and go to edit it in Photoshop CS4. I have my format set to work in 8-bit PSD files at 300 dpi(Aperture>Preferences>Export), and am using the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 color profile embedded in the picture. My proofing profile in Aperture is also set to this same profile (View>Proofing Profile), as well as the working profile in Photoshop CS4 (Edit>Color Settings). And this is what I get:
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/9311/35278285.png
Note that I haven’t made a single adjustment in Photoshop! It just opens that way!
Let’s say I go a step further and try to recover my desaturated image. I’ll apply a series of filters here that I normally wouldn’t for this image, but will do here to further illustrate my point. Here’s what I produce:
http://img249.imageshack.us/img249/6954/97748984.png
And now for the fun part. I save (File>Save) the image in Photoshop making sure to Maximize compatibility (since Aperture can’t seem to read it if I don’t select this) and Aperture faithfully works to update the preview of the image. Unfortanately, the image now looks like this:
http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/9811/77252849.png
So basically, I have no color management occurring from program to program. I know photographers use both of these programs successfully, but I just can’t make them preserve color faithfully! It happens with TIFF files, it occurs no matter if I use a PC, or either version of Aperture or Lightroom! I’ve tried multiple Macs and multiple OS versions, and am clearly missing something.
Help me!
(The minor issue I described above may be corrected if we can get this fixed, so I’ll follow-up if needed.)

Lets see if we can figure this out.
I personally use a calibrated Apple Cinema Display to start with so maybe that makes a difference.
So, in Aperture do this
1) edit the image of choice
2) if you like go ahead and set the onscreen proofing profile -let's use sRGB 2.1 in this example
— View>Proofing Profile then select sRGB on the top
3) Then select the "Onscreen Proofing" so it is checked also under the View menu
4) Go to your Aperture Export presets
— Aperture>Presets>Image Export
5) The very top preset usually is "JPEG - Original Size"
— make sure the color profile is "sRGB IEC61966-2.1"
— make sure "Black Point Compensation" is NOT checked
Now, the image you just edited go ahead and "export Version" and save it to the desktop
When done open it in Photoshop.
Make sure that your color settings in Photoshop is set to sRGB
HOWEVER, if it isn't, you may get a message that the "embedded profile does not match your working space in photoshop"
NOTE: if Photoshop is set to Adobe RGB , that too is ok and that's when you will get the "mismatch profile message"
So, IF you DO get that message, the rule is ALWAYS Honor the embedded profile of the image/photo
If your Photoshop is set to sRGB too, then you won't need to worry about this.
If your image still looks washed out at this point let us know.
In my case what I export from Aperture 3 looks the same in Photoshop CS4
Message was edited by: Falcon01

Similar Messages

Monitor/Photoshop/Color profile issue

heyz! yesterday i changed my monitor profile from srgb to prophoto rgb while viewing some images in photoshop. they displayed the same colors after the change, but today i opened photoshop again and with the same images and all the colors were dissaturated. ive done some search and found the probable cause is a ”broken” monitor profile, or one that doesnt match its capabilities. i changed to adobe rgb, reopened photoshop and that image seems to look right, but i think still not how i remember it from yesterday. my question is: is this really the problem and is there a way i can find whats the largest color space my monitor can display without reading its tech book?( cos its long lost)
thanks!
ps: when changing the monitor profile to prophoto i also played with color settings in ps and set it to prophoto/adobe rgb, but that image has an embedded profile and i chose preserve embedded profile when opening it, so i dont think thats the problem.

If there's a question here it's pretty vague. So, here's how it works, in general terms:
A monitor profile is a description of the monitor's native color space. And as such it also defines the gamut of your monitor. But the profile doesn't actually "handle" anything, it doesn't do anything - it's just a description.
Photoshop's color management system is where things are handled. Here, the document color profile is converted, on the fly, into the monitor profile, and these modified RGB values are sent to the monitor. That's all there is to it - a straight and perfectly normal profile conversion. RGB values are remapped to produce the same color.
Any profile can be converted into any other. But any colors in the source color space that would fall outside the target color space, are just clipped to the gamut limit, and they're effectively gone forever. If you have a ProPhoto file displayed on a standard monitor, it's reasonable to assume that a lot of gamut clipping has occurred before it hits the screen, because the monitor color space is a lot smaller.
A standard traditional monitor has a native color space that is very close to sRGB. That's why you can use sRGB as display profile, although of course a calibrator will make one that is much more accurate. This is also why sRGB is the standard for web, because it will display roughly right even without any color management.
Some monitors have a larger color space, and are close to Adobe RGB. These are relatively expensive and are known as wide gamut. If you have such a monitor, it can only be used with full end-to-end color management. In the absence of color management, sRGB material will not display correctly on these monitors, but considerably oversaturated. This is the implication you have to accept when you buy a wide gamut monitor.

Camera Raw Color Temperature Issue

Help me verify color temperature issue please.
I shoot with Canon EOS 5D.
I sat white balance mode to K - Manual Kelvin temperature - and set value to 6000K.
So my raw files should have this setting - color temperature 6000K.
Canon ZoomBrowser EX shows me the value - 6000K
Nevertheless I see different reading in Adobe Camera RAW converter (as shot)?
Photoshop CS2 Camera Raw CT=5600K Tint=+3 (! as Shot !)
Why?

Ramon seemed to have the answer in hand, then G Sch above chimed in with some random comment about coordinate systems. Weirdly, Ramon then agreed with G Sch's nonsense and thanked him for it. Suddenly the thread has suffered an ineluctable defenestration.
Is:
- camera maker's control for XXXX Kelvin wrong?
- Adobe's control for XXXX Kelvin wrong?
- the use of the designator "K" in these contexts wrong, as it implies physics reference for the measure while the camera and ACR just do their own thing?
By the logic used in this thread, 1/250sec shutter doesn't have anything to do with a time standard, nor does F4 mean an aperture, it's just a coordinate in a locally defined system, la la la. So why bother to even code it in EXIF? What's the point of providing a control in terms of K if K isn't normalized?
The question was answered at Ramon's first post: ACR doesn't read the 5D white bal metadata. The camera K setting is used for in-camera processing and by Canon utilities. But note that the raw data are white bal agnostic but white bal results are subject to a camera profile which may differ between OEM and ACR, and at which point there is room for discrepancy for interpretation of color. Which one is right? I can't say. It's important to realize the results for a given K setting may differ between OEM and ACR because of this. Contrary to what G Sch writes above, the same K setting ought to give the same results if a "Kelvin" setting is to have real meaning, but the seems to be impracticable if the developers don't agree on the characterization of the gear.

A different take on the "Save For Web" color shift issue...

Ok, everyone who has fussed much with photoshop and "Save For Web" knows about the color shift issue. If you want your colors to look right after you "save for web", you have to work in the sRGB colorspace, and have Proof Colors checked (soft proofing on) and the proof color setup set to Monitor RGB, otherwise what you get looks terrible when displayed in a browser.
But of course if you are editing for print, this is exactly what you DON'T want to do. Well, I work in both. In fact, often the same images, and I want them to appear as close as reasonably possible in both print and web formats, and without a lot of fussing on my part. And I'm pickiest about the print mode, since I have the most control there, so that's the way I want to edit by default.
Nothing new here.
Now comes the interesting part (in my mind, anyway). Obviously there is a known remapping -- because PhotoShop DOES it when you select Proof Colors. So the inverse mapping must also be known (with some gamut issues, but I'm not concerned with those, because, after all, I'm VIEWING it on a monitor anyway!). What I want is a plug-in that automatically applies that inverse mapping so that, when I do a Save For Web, I end up with the colors I've been viewing all the time when setting the shot up in print mode. Then, too, I don't have to worry about what mode I'm in when I'm editing -- it just fixes it when doing a save-for-web.
Again, I want to edit in my normal print mode (typically ProPhoto colorspace, and with soft-proofing off or set to the printer/medium combination I expect to use), then do a single operation (might be a multi-step action) to "screw up" my colors so that when I then do a "Save-For-Web", the resulting image, when viewed on the average color-stupid browser, looks like the image I've been seeing in Photoshop.
Anyone know of such a beast?   I would gladly pay for a plug-in that really works and fixes the problem.
And if you have other solutions, I'm interested, but the absolute requirement is that it I do one single edit pass for my colors for both print and web use, and I get what I see on the screen in PS on both the prints and on the web display (i.e., working in sRGB/Monitor RGB mode all the time won't cut it). And PREFERABLY, let me do all my editing work in the ProPhoto (or at least AdobeRGB) colorspace so I have a gamut closer to what the printer can do.
Anyone got a decent solution for this?

Sorry, I think I'm being unclear. This has nothing to do with individual monitor profiles. In Proof Setup, "Monitor RGB" amounts to turning off ALL color management, and simply letting the monitor do what it will. It is what the vast majority of web browsers do (even if the operating system provides color management, the browsers don't take advantage of it), so that is what you need to consider for images that will be viewed on a web browser. If you convert your image to sRGB, select Monitor RGB in Proof Set up, and turn on Proof Colors, you will see the image as it would appear on a web browser (after you save it as a jpg or use "Save For Web/Devices" to save it as a jpg).   Since almost everyone is running different uncalibrated monitors, there will be lots of variation in how it will look to them, so precise control of the color is unimportant.
That said, I would expect the color on a calibrated monitor (such as the one I use when editing) to be reasonably close to the colors I am seeing while editing in PS. To the extent a monitor deviates from "calibrated", those colors will vary, but a good monitor should show good colors.   Unfortunately, this is NOT the case, as my previous post shows. The colors produced by the steps above are oversaturated and significantly shifted in hue. There is, to my mind, anyway, no reason for this. Adobe clearly knows what the mapping is between the colors as it displays them in PS and the un-controlled "Monitor RGB" -- that is, it is the color map they are using during normal editing display. If they were to reverse-apply that map prior to saving it as a jpg, then the image would appear on a browser on that same (presumably calibrated) monitor very similar to what you set up when editing. Anyone else viewing the image on a web browser with a calibrated monitor would also see good colors. To the extent other viewers' monitors are out of calibration, their colors will suck, but there's nothing you can do about that.
I guess in some sense I AM "asking for a Color-Mamangement-solution for a "non-Color-Management-situation", but specifically I'm asking for PS Color Management to do the best it can for non-Color-Managed situations that we all face every day.
Does that make more sense?

Looking for a better solution to the "Save for web" color shift issue

Ok, everyone who has fussed much with photoshop and "Save For Web" knows about the color shift issue. If you want your colors to look right after you "save for web", you have to work in the sRGB colorspace, and have Proof Colors checked (soft proofing on) and the proof color setup set to Monitor RGB, otherwise what you get looks terrible when displayed in a browser.
But of course if you are editing for print, this is exactly what you DON'T want to do. Well, I work in both. In fact, often the same images, and I want them to appear as close as reasonably possible in both print and web formats, and without a lot of fussing on my part. And I'm pickiest about the print mode, since I have the most control there, so that's the way I want to edit by default.
Nothing new here.
Now comes the interesting part (in my mind, anyway). Obviously there is a known remapping -- because PhotoShop DOES it when you select Proof Colors. So the inverse mapping must also be known (with some gamut issues, but I'm not concerned with those, because, after all, I'm VIEWING it on a monitor anyway!). What I want is a plug-in that automatically applies that inverse mapping so that, when I do a Save For Web, I end up with the colors I've been viewing all the time when setting the shot up in print mode. Then, too, I don't have to worry about what mode I'm in when I'm editing -- it just fixes it when doing a save-for-web.
Again, I want to edit in my normal print mode (typically ProPhoto colorspace, and with soft-proofing off or set to the printer/medium combination I expect to use), then do a single operation (might be a multi-step action) to "screw up" my colors so that when I then do a "Save-For-Web", the resulting image, when viewed on the average color-stupid browser, looks like the image I've been seeing in Photoshop.
Anyone know of such a beast? I would gladly pay for a plug-in that really works and fixes the problem.
And if you have other solutions, I'm interested, but the absolute requirement is that it I do one single edit pass for my colors for both print and web use, and I get what I see on the screen in PS on both the prints and on the web display (i.e., working in sRGB/Monitor RGB mode all the time won't cut it). And PREFERABLY, let me do all my editing work in the ProPhoto (or at least AdobeRGB) colorspace so I have a gamut closer to what the printer can do.
Anyone got a decent solution for this?

Chris
I spent all day Googling and doing side by side comparisons of my old and new systems.
My display is a Dell U2410. It has several presets, including sRGB and Adobe RGB. I've been using sRGB.
On my OLD system, (Win XP, PsCS2, DwCS4) there seems to be no distinction between color managed and non color managed apps, even on this wide gamut display. I could capture (digital camera) in Adobe RGB, open and edit in PsCS2, save as .psd, convert to CMYK for print, or convert to sRGB for SFW. All images looked identical and they printed and displayed perfectly. I thought this was normal, and seemed logical. This also seems to be the source of my incorrect assumptions. I was trying to get my new machine to behave like my old one.
So I get this new machine (Windows 7, PsCS5, DwCS5) and now (still in sRGB display mode) all color managed apps appear de-saturated. Non color managed apps are OK. If I switch the display to Adobe RGB, color managed apps are OK, but non color managed apps are way too saturated. From my investigation, I believe this is normal behavior on a wide gamut display. I've tried changing the Control Panel > Display > Screen Resolution > Advanced settings > Color Management options, but to no avail. Either I'm missing something, or Windows 7 is doing color management differently.
It seems my only option now is to use Adobe RGB display setting for Ps, etc. and switch to sRGB for Dw and non color managed apps. Or, have 2 separate files for print and web. I've Googled 'til my eyes are numb and still not sure I'm getting this. Any enlightenment would be greatly appreciated.
Finally, I don't see an edit function here, so I can't remove my previous incorrect reply. Moderator, please feel free to do so.
Thanks

Color rendering issue

i'm using aperture since version 1. and till today i see the same color rendering issues which occurs when applying heavy exposure correction on my canon pro camera files. when i correct overexposed images i get a strange yellow posterisation not a smooth transition like with, capture one, raw developer, adobe lightroom & arc. i decided to do a more controlled test to see whats going on. the result is kind of disapointing...... http://db.tt/xGvmhOzK not only is aperture far behind when it comes to recover overexposed areas compared to it's competitors it also shows missing colors !

well i tried adjusting them, but it makes no difference, i am thinking it is a xorg issue

Color Management issues with Illustrator

Can someone help me figure out the color management issues I'm getting when printing on an Epson 3880 from Illustrator?
The image comes out severely red as evident on the face. I'm not getting the same problem when printing from Photoshop, even though I set same paper profile in printing dialog box.
I attached two printed picture (one from Photoshop CC, and one from Illustrator CC) that I took with my iphone so that you can see the printed result. Even when I try to simulate same thing using illustrator soft proofing process, the soft proof does not show me anything close to how it gets printed out. And I tried all device simulations to see if any would match it. Im using CMYK SWOP v2 for Color space in both programs.

Dougfly,
Only an hour wasted? Lucky you. Color is an incredibly complex subject. First, forget matching anything to the small LCD on the back of your camera. That's there as a basic guide and is affected by the internal jpg algorithm of your camera.
2nd, you're not really takeing a color photo with your digital camera, but three separate B&W images in a mosaic pattern, exposed thru separate red, green and blue filters. Actual color doesn't happen until that matrix is demosaiced in either your raw converter, or the in-camera processor (which relies heavily on camera settings, saturation, contrast, mode, etc.)
Having said the above, you can still get very good, predictable results in your workflow. I have a few color management articles on my website that you might find very helpful. Check out the Introduction to Color Management and Monitor and Printer Profiling. In my opinion, a monitor calibration device is the minimum entry fee if you want decent color.
http://www.dinagraphics.com/color_management.php
Lou

Aperture, Photoshop, and Apple's possible direction for Image Editing

All,
After using Aperture now for several days, and reading many different forum topics, in particular this one which speaks of desired enhancements to Aperture:
http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=253594&tstart=0
there is one thing that really sticks out on my mind. While all of us photographers have slightly different specifics to our workflow, in general they are very similar. And with respect to Aperture, there is one huge area where most of us seem to be hitting the brick wall: image adjustments, and by extension, image file management. Let me explain what I mean.
I think it is a fair generalization to say that the vast majority of serious digital photographers are using Photoshop (or some other image editing app, but I'm just going to refer to Photoshop for convenience) for post-processing of some kind. In using Aperture, and figuring out how to fit it into workflow, we've got this situation of how to move from organization and image library management to the full gamut of image adjusting functionality (photoshop) and back again to library management. The need to use photoshop then exposes the issue of how files are stored on the filesystem, etc. Stay with me here...
I have found myself thinking, and it is pretty clearly demonstrated in the forum topic mentioned above where folks are making suggestions for improvements to Aperture, that there's this barrel people are over in knowing whether Photoshop and Aperture should live in the workflow together, or whether Aperture should (or is intended to) replace Photoshop in the workflow. This got me to thinking about the fundamental question -- what is the intent, i.e. the vision for Aperture? Is it meant to replace Photoshop, or restated, is Aperture meant to be the app in which all image adjustments are to be made, OR is Aperture meant to just ease workflow, and is it intended not to be the primary app for image adjustments, but rather integrate with the primary image adjustment app?
The reason I bring this up is that the answer to this question makes all the difference in what enhancement requests and what people should expect from Aperture now, and in future versions. If Aperture is the primary place for image adjustment, then its obvious that there are some very significant additions that need to take place to Aperture, and likewise, the issue of putting images on the filesystem becomes much less important. However, if Aperture is a workflow-easer, then such image adjustment improvements are minimally important if at all, and filesystem / Photoshop / PSD file integration becomes paramount.
I know what Aperture does, what features it provides, etc. But I can't help but realize that its not really that clear (or I just don't understand yet) what the full scope of Aperture now and in the future is intended to be, and the forum topics are pretty decent documentation of the fact that the user base at this point is fairly cloudy on that too.
I can't help thinking that in the midst of the Apple pro line of tools, where we have tools that edit: video, audio, DVD creation, text effects, and now digital photography workflow, that there's one glaring hole: static image editing, i.e. a direct Photoshop competitor. I went through the Aperture video demos before Aperture shipped, and watched these photo pros talk incessantly about how "now there's an app that addresses how I work -- Aperture". That's great, but Apple has to know the role that Photoshop plays in present photography workflow -- for those pros too. So I'm sitting here thinking to myself, why would Apple roll out such a product with some clear workflow hurdles to common Photoshop usage.
Ok, here's the punchline: does anyone else here have a sneaking suspicion that Apple is not to far off from releasing their own image editing application that's a direct Photoshop competitor? I mean come on, Final Cut Pro, Motion, Sountrack, and by extension of the CEO to Pixar, Renderman. How can you not have a static image adjustment application entering the scene at some point?
I'm curious what others think. I'm just trying to make sense of how to fit the neat stuff I see in Aperture into a workflow that doesn't play very nicely with Aperture at some points (because I'm using Photoshop).
Brad
Powerbook G4-1.33GHz-17" / Powermac G4-1.4GHz Mac OS X (10.4.2) PB: 1GB RAM, Radeon 9600-64MB / PM: 1.25GB RAM, Radeon 9000Pro-128MB

So Apple adds curves adjustments,
we'll need noise reduction, greater sharpening
capability, etc., etc., and then when we have all
those features, surely we'll need masking and select
capability to perform those adjustments selectively,
etc. Where does it end?
Actually that could be a good cut-off point - add a few more/better 'global' adjustments but leave all mask, selection and layer based tasks to external editors. Personally, I used to swear by curves, but haven't really touched them in PS for a year since shooting more RAW and learning how to use the shadow/highlight adjustment properly. Sometimes for overall colour for JPEGs, but that bit can be done just as well in levels.
My workflow isn't particularly typical, but here goes.
Type of photography - stitched panoramas as a professional, plus general snapshots/nature/landscape as hobby. Single user with no network storage.
Currently I use a very organised folder structure in the Finder, along with aliases in DragThing docks for easy access to final stitched files, all with their own unique ID. RAW conversions are done in ACR/PSCS2, or Bibble if I'm in a hurry on the laptop. About 40% of the panos are shot in RAW, 40% are bracketed JPEG and the remaining 20% are 'single' JPEG. The panoramas go through quite a lot of post-processing in PS using a whole series of actions and AppleScripts.
I'm expecting my workflow to look something like this:
1) Download directly into Aperture, possibly with added help from Automator/Applescript when it comes to proper date-based names.
2) Divide download into a new album for each panorama.
2a) If it is a people pano there will be quite a lot of duplicate shots for each panohead position - make a stack for each position and choose picks - this bit will speed things up enormously by itself. Reorder stacks to fit correct order of images going around the scene.
3) Export to TIFF (sometimes JPEG) and stitch using PTMac (sometimes Realviz Stitcher). Oh, and any people who think Aperture is limited, buggy and bad value should go and look at Stitcher - it costs the same, has a far more limited feature set, is on version 5 and by comparison makes Aperture look bug-free.
4) Bring stitched panorama into Photoshop to adjust seams through layers if needed, flatten, final tone adjustments (usually using shadow/highlight), possibly some colour tweaks, sharpen. For bracketed shots I will blend together the three exposures at this point using a custom action - this kind of thing is unlikely ever to make it to Aperture.
5) Bring final print-ready file into Aperture for cataloguing/backup.
5a) If file is too big for Aperture, make a smaller version for cataloguing and store original file in Finder. This gives me a good file for 90% of purposes, with the huge file available with a bit more work.
Too big? I've found that Aperture gets sluggish with files over 18-20,000 pixels wide, and chokes totally somewhere between 25,000 and 32,000 pixels wide - 'image format unsupported'.
To summarise - organise and convert in Aperture, stitch in specialist software, do PS-specific stuff then bring final image back in to join the source images.
Ian

Edit With - Photoshop color shift

When using Edit With -> Photoshop with my 12 and 14-bit NEF files, the resulting file (after editing in PS) has a color shift. Same happens when I export a Version as 16-bit TIFF or PSD and then re-import it into Aperture.
I have tried it with 8-bit JPGs from camera, and the shift does not occur. Has anyone come across this problem and have a remedy? Your help would be greatly appreciated guys, thanks!

Ah, thanks for the tip. I've changed my Photoshop color settings to warn me when opening files with embedded color profiles. I simply choose to work in the embedded profile and upon saving and returning to Aperture, no longer notice any color shift. Thanks again!

Simple color control panel.

My largest beef with Lightroom is that for the most part, the HSL sliders are good for creative color but difficult and slow for color corrections. And the white balance controls are terrible for color corrections when used to an RGB system as used in Photoshop (RGB Histogram, RGB Curves and probably the most useful, least appreciated tool the Color Balance controls.)
What I suggest is either a panel on the main Develop module with essentially the Photoshop Color Balance controls (perhaps plus a density slider) with the ability to switch to an RGB Histogram or Curves mode as well. Or better yet, an additional module that has these controls plus Density, Gamma, Contrast, Saturation, Vibrance and a customizable display of one or several images for easy color corrections and display of reference images and/or a selected image in the set to help aim color and skin tones towards.
Any improvement in the speed and ease of color correction would be great.

Color shift (color management) issues in Mavericks

Noticed color management lacking for Safari and Dock icons just after Maverick update, but was unable to check it with recalibration. Today X-Rite issued an update for i1 Display PRO and i was able to recalibrate my display, but the problem unsurprisingly wasn't in the display profile.
Bellow are two screenshots of Safari vs. Chrome and FF vs. Chrome respectively.
Color difference is seen with the naked eye, but gray and blue fields' values are also annotated (Safari is on the left, Chrome is on the right).
These are FF (on the left) and Chrome (on the right) with no color difference, both browsers are color-managed.

Issues here too: 2013 Mac Pro, latest Mavericks/browser versions (OS X 10.9.4), and Dell UP2414Q display (known for good color—not to mention the only retina display money can buy).
Safari seems fine: web sites with no color profiles in the images look very much as I am used to from OS X Lion and Windows on other machines (some variation from screen to screen is just life). CSS colors match image colors when they should.
Firefox is ultra-saturated: web sites the look fine in Firefox--and identical to Safari--under OS X Lion (on a different Mac/display anyway) but on the new Mavericks system, colors are eye-burningly saturated! That's CSS and images alike (without color profiles). CSS and image colors still match—but both are WAY oversaturated.
Note: images dragged from Safari and Firefox to my desktop both look fine when opened in Quick Look or Preview. Both (again, images without profiles) look super-saturated like Firefox when opened in Photoshop CC—despite Photoshop having the same settings I'm used to using (color management Off for RGB, working space set to Monitor) on my old Mac with PS CS6 under Lion. Yet the color values in PS CC do register as correct despite looking so bad (same goes when opening my own RGB source PSDs that generated the web sites to begin with).
Shouldn't Safari and Firefox out of the box look alike, since they do in earlier OS versions? (Even if some workaround is found, "out of the box" a new Mac with default Firefox installation now looks terrible.)
Separate but complicating issues, in case it helps to diagnose this:
a) The Dell display's default calibration looks quite good to me; but if I run Apple's visual calibration steps which I would normally do on a new Mac, everything gets very dark. (So I went back to the default calibration, which is supplied by Apple and called "Dell UP2414Q"; Apple clearly supports this display specifically, since I never installed any Dell software.)
b) When I take an OS X screenshot of Safari, despite it looking "right" everywhere (Preview and Photoshop CC alike), values are way off. (Regardless of whether I strip the color profile or not when importing the screenshot into Photoshop CC.) When I take a screenshot off Firefox, the screenshot looks "right" (no longer oversaturated!) in Preview and Quicklook. When imported into Photoshop CC, Firefox screenshots behave just like drag-saved images from Firefox: they appear super-saturated just like in the browser, BUT the color values at least register correctly.
c) No setting I can find for Photoshop CC will make exported images look right (and match CSS colors) in ANY browser unless I accept them being super-saturated while I work on them (which of course is untenable). I'll deal with that separately: I've abandoned the new Mac Pro for Photoshop work and gone back to my old Mac (and PS CS6)--but this I assume to be Adobe's fault. I mention it only in case it's some kind of clue.
For what it's worth, here's my interpretation: Firefox and Photoshop are using the full gamut of the display, while Safari is not—and Safari looks GOOD not using the full gamut. (And at least with this Dell display, it looks "correct" that way.) Pure primary red #FF0000 (images and CSS alike) which appears normal to me in Safari and Preview and Quicklook turns to eye-burning neon red in Firefox and Photoshop (with management Off and working space set to Monitor). It's kind of amazing that the display can show a red even more brilliant than I have ever seen on a computer before, BUT it doesn't help me design web sites for the rest of the world who has a more ordinary gamut.
Maybe this is just a long-standing Firefox bug, revealed to me now that I have a large-gamut display? (But that wouldn't explain why other people have seen colors MORE saturated in Safari then Firefox.)

5s Volume control issues

Anyone having volume control issues? My wife's 5s (less than a month old) is having issues with the up volume. If she mutes it using the down volume, it won't go back up. I can get it to work if I hold the volume a long time and it eventually comes back. Or last time i had to remove her case, hold the volume and release several times before it finally kicked in. Any thoughts or ideas? Thanks.

Hi,
Please test in other computer to see if the issue persists, it may be caused by the bad output channel.
But for better solution, I recommend you go to MSDN forum for further help.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-US/
Thanks for your understanding!
Regards,
Ada Liu
TechNet Community Support

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.

Network color control -

HP Officejet Pro 8500A A910a How is color controled with an ethernet network connection? Printer properties have been set to black ink only, the printer continues to print in full color. The printer setting webpage has no option for color.

Kaynray
Had you been using wired networking before you began to set up wireless? Had you given yourself Administration status with command-u, or were you using default TCP/IP and AppleTalk windows? Had you used command-k from the TCP/IP window to name a location (configuration)? Failing that your automatically assigned configuration would have been Default. It is worth your while from the standpoint of security to use these facilities, and, if necessary to set up a different configuration for wi-fi, lest there be any conflict in TCP/IP Preferences between an older wired or dial-up configuration and the wireless. If you wish to overwrite the old configuration by editing it, that is possible. You can choose, if you wish, to maintain several different configurations and connection modes with different names. As an administrator, you are able to change between them at will in much the same way as OS X provides, although the windows and access methods look different.
Apple IIe; 68K: 11DT + 4PB; PPC: 5DT + 3PB; G3: 6DT System 6.0.8 to OS 10.4.x

Legal control Issue - License cannot be used

Hi Team,
The sales order has Legal Control: Issue Error, due to this we are unable to deliver the goods. the below message found in the Log details:
Access object: License Master
Key (license nubmer): xxxxx
Validity period not long enough
Requested delivery date for item: 02/20/2012
End of validity period of license: 1231/2011
License cannot be used
we tried to extend the validity of license but it is not allowing. can anyone give some inputs on this error.
Thanks,
Rajam

Its a SAP GTS related error.
I hope you are aware of the License are created under Legal Control in GTS system.
If I'm not wrong, we can maintain License (GTS) by using TCode /SAPSLL/LCLIC01 and if the License is in active mode then can be modified by using TCode /SAPSLL/LCD_CHANGE
If my input didn't assist, then try to post your SAP GTS related query in SCN Forum following, for expertise help on SAP GTS.
- [Forum on *_SAP Global Trade Service_*|SAP Global Trade Services (GTS);
Regards
JP

Aperture/Photoshop Color Control Issues

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for