Color Management in Mail Stationery Mixes Color Profiles

Using Leopard's new Stationery in Mail, I drag my own pictures to the drop zones in the stationery and Mail composites them with the stationery's background into an image that should blend seamlessly with the rest of the email.
The problem is that Mail embeds a different color profile for the composited images than it does for the stock parts of the stationery. This causes a color mismatch between the different parts of the email when viewed in a non-color-managed application, e.g. through an online mail service using Internet Explorer. The images that are stock parts of the stationery use the generic RGB profile, while the composited images use the same profile that my system display is using.
Is there a way to control what kind of color management is going on when creating Mail messages?

After digging around, I found that the behavior of Firefox can be changed to assume sRGB on untagged images by putting about:config into the address bar and changing the value of gfx.color_management.mode to 1. I vaguely recall doing something similar for Chrome years ago, but can't for the life of me rememebr what I did. When upgrading to 10.8, I did a fresh install so any mods to Chrome are no longer present.
As for Safari, I have never really used it and only notcied it behaved similarly when trying it because Chrome wasn't working. Still can't figure out why Safari works correctly when you select "open in new tab" though. Maybe this should be moved to the Safari forum?

Similar Messages

  • Color management - Spyder2 PRO or Custom ICC profile?

    I've got a Canon MP800 (multi-function inkjet) that I use at home for prints. As I get more serious about photography, I'm noticing that the colors I get on my prints are not matching what I see on my monitor very well.
    I'm using an Apple LCD, and I've done the software calibration and created a custom monitor profile. From within Aperture, I then use the canned Canon print profile for the type of paper I'm using. In the print dialog box, I select "no color management". Still, the prints tend to have a slight orange cast or they are "warmer" than I see them on my monitor.
    I am considering two possible next steps, and I'd like to get your feedback on which would be most appropriate for my set-up.
    1. Get the Spyder2 PRO Studio hardware/software combo, or
    2. Get a custom ICC profile made for my printer through Neil Barstow/Pixl
    They cost about the same, but I'm wondering what would give me the best prints. I'm still a novice when it comes to color management, but I'm reading Martin Evening's "PS CS2 for Photographers" and learning a lot.
    Your help is appreciated!

    I thought I'd mention that I have the EyeOne Display 2, and it came with a certificate that takes $200 off the csot of the more advanced system if I decide to upgrade at some point...
    So the earlier note about profiling the monitor first is a good one, and you might be out as much money if you do need to also profile the printer.
    I'll add a note that everyone really needs to profile monitors, especailly if you have two or you aren't really comapring apples to apples when doing image comparisons across both screens.
    Confusingly the EyeOne instructions claim if you have two monitors running on one video card it can only profile one of the monitors. That's not true on the Mac, you just need to move the menu bar to the screen you wish to profile. OS X has an icc profile per screen that gets set by the software.

  • How to turn off color management in Canon MX860 for printer profile

    I just got my Spyder3Print updated with the SR software to calibrate my Canon MX860 on a Mac OS X system. I am using 3rd party paper (Kirkland) and 3rd party ink (uni-kit). There are no existing .icc profiles out there for this combo. I have been using canons "GL2/GL3" profile which does not give me, as expected, a good color match.
    When the program asks to print the target it says to make sure the "color management is off".
    I cannot find an "off" selection. In the "color mode" portion of the dialog box I do get to choose between "colorsync" and "canon color matching"???
    I was guessing colorsync and then I have to pick a printer/paper/ink .icc profile. Not sure what to use for this first target print.
    Not sure if that choice represents color managment off?

    Just got the answer from Spyder:
    his applies to ALL Canon printers drivers running under both Leopard and Snow Leopard and it's the correct "solution" to get them to print without color management (a critical, unavoidable requirement for building custom printer profiles with any 3rd party printer profiling solution).
    Make sure you're running OSX 10.6.2 or whatever the latest is. There have also been some Canon driver updates that will show up in System Preferences:Software Update, so make sure you've got nothing left to apply as an update. Another way to make sure you have the latest Canon driver installed: go to Print & Fax, select your current Canon driver, and click on Options and Supplies... to see what version it is. (It should be 10.26.0.0 or later, and here's the Apple list of latest drivers for all printers):
    http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3669
    If you don't have the most recent driver, then click "-" to remove the older Canon driver from the list. Then, with the printer attached and powered on, click "+", and add back the driver for it (this should download and install the latest version for you).
    Now: when you PRINT and want to turn off color management in Spyder3Print, THIS is the way to do it:
    In the Color Matching pane of the driver, select ColorSync (not Vendor Matching, or Canon Color Matching!)
    In the popup beneath that, you'll see "Automatic"; a list of all the Canon standard profiles; and a command to choose from other profiles. Use that last command to see a list of all profiles on your system.
    Select "Generic RGB" from the list. (this is the key). Then say OK and you'll see that "Generic RGB" shows beneath the ColorSync radio button in the Color Matching pane. This is the secret to disabling color management with the Canon drivers in Snow Leopard (and it also works in Leopard, as well, although in that case, a warning gets displayed underneath "Generic RGB", which can be ignored)
    Select the paper type, output quality, resolution, etc. as usual and print the target sheet. (Just leave the Color Options pane alone)
    NOW you should get a properly dark (non-color-managed) target print. Measure this and build a profile.
    Printing with "No Color Management" from Photoshop actually works the same way. It invisibly pushes through "Generic RGB" or an equivalent when you choose "No Color Management" in its Print dialog, This is why, in the Color Matching pane of the driver, ColorSync subsequently comes up auto-selected and also disabled; Photoshop has done the same thing I just described "under the hood" and as a result, that choice in the driver gets "locked".
    When printing through the profile in Photoshop: do it the usual way. (Photoshop Manages Colors, choose the profile, Saturation intent, etc etc etc). It should work fine.
    When doing a test print from inside Spyder3Print: since Spyder3Print applies the profile internally to the image data before it's sent to the driver, you should set the driver up exactly the same as when you printed the target image (as I've described above), so this would be ColorSync:Generic RGB in the Color Matching pane.

  • Paper profiles in the color management dialog

    Hello:I am new to the LR 2 print module I have used CS4. I find that the color management dialogue under
    "other" does not contain all the color and BW paper profiles that are downloaded into the color folder in Widows. I use Vista 64  but I have not checked any of the checkboxes in the color management dialog thereby knowingly excluding any profiles. How do I get all my profiles into color mangement in LR 2?
    Thnaks
    Roger Lieberman
    [email protected]

    Check that the profiles are installed in the correct location as shown in the Choose Profiles dialog box which opens from LR. On 32 bit OS this is windows/system32/spool/drivers/color...this may be different on 64 bit OS. LR will only recognise RGB profiles so if you have CYMK profile these will not show up.Also check the box Include Display Profiles as sometimes paper profiles show up as display profiles for some reason.

  • Does Firefox 3.5 support only some ICC profiles (AdobeRGB, sRGB, e.g.) or all ICC profiles in color management?

    I put one image embedded with a ICC profile with D65 as white point, and the same image embedded with another ICC profile but with D50 as white point (the 'chad' matrix in the profile is different as well, given different white point for two profiles). When these two images (of same RGB values) but with different ICC profiles embedded are displayed side-by-side in Firefox, difference in color should be noticed between two images if color management is available in Firefox (color management is turned on in about:config). However, I did not see any difference.
    I tried using the same image but embedded one with sRGB profile, and the other with AdobeRGB profile. Now I can see the difference.
    So my question is whether Firefox can only recognize a certain number of ICC profiles but not all of them.
    Thanks.

    See https://developer.mozilla.org/En/ICC_color_correction_in_Firefox
    <blockquote>Caveats: The new QCMS color management system introduced in Firefox 3.5 currently only supports ICC version 2 color profiles, not version 4.
    </blockquote>
    http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter

  • Preview Color Management broken? Profile not applied?

    Hi all,
    I've come upon an inconsistency and wondered if anyone else is having this issue?
    I profiled my Xerox Color Laser Printer. When I print out of Photoshop CS 4 my prints look great.
    If I print out of Preview (Mac OS X 7.5), the colors are not correct and the In Printer color management prints match the ColorSync Color Managed with my new custom profile selected prints? I tried turning on the soft proofing, and the screen image in Preview looks amazingly like my successful Photoshop Color Managed Print, but when I print, the image appears as if the printer profile is not being applied. FYI, this profile is an ICC v2 Profile.
    As I noted prints out of Photoshop are accurate and just fine.
    Any help would be appreciated.
    Thanks, and so long for now, TOM

    Thanks for the reply Richard. I indeed tried the latest driver, 91.31. The new control panel was quite confusing. I managed to get to the performance and quality place, but there was no way to set a color profile to a specific game, so keeping the same drivers, I went back to the classic control panel. Color profiles can't seem to be applied for game profiles, as the value in the profile switches to a "0" every time I hit apply (read that some other guy on the nZone forums had the same issues). So as of now, I just use the 84.21 drivers and set the color profile manually in the taskbar.
    By the way, does anyone else here set color profiles in their game profiles? If so, how's the experience?

  • Printing, Soft Proofing & Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions

    Printing, Soft Proofing, and Color Management in LR 1.2: Two Questions
    There are 2 common ways to set color management in Adobe CS2:
    1. use managed by printer setting or,
    2. use managed by Adobe CS2 program.
    I want to ask how Color Management for Adobe LR 1.2 differs from that in CS2?
    As is well known, Color Management by printer requires accurate printer profiles including specific model printer, types of ink and specific paper. It is clear that this seems to work well for LR 1.2 when using the Printer module.
    Now lets consider what happens one tries to use Color Management by Adobe LR 1.2. Again, as is well known, Color Management by printer must be turned off so that only one Color Management system is used. It has been my experience that LR 1.2 cant Color Manage my images correctly. Perhaps someone with more experience can state whether this is true or what I might be doing to invalidate LR 1.2 Color Management.
    Specifically, I cant use Soft Proofing to see how my images are changed on my monitor when I try to use the edit functions in LR 1.2. Martin Evening states in his text, The Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Book that it is not possible to display the results of the rendered choices (Perceptual or Relative) on the display monitor. While it is not clear in Evenings text if this applies to LR 1.2, my experience would suggest that it still applies to the 1.2 update even though the publication date of his book preceded this update.
    Can someone with specific knowledge of Adobe LR 1.2 confirm that Color Management and Soft Proofing with LR 1.2 hasnt been implemented at the present.
    The writer is a retired physicist with experience in laser physics and quantum optics.
    Thanks,
    Hersch Pilloff

    Hersch,
    since just like me, you're a physicist (I am just a little further from retirement ;) ) I'll explain a little further. computer screens (whether they are CRT or LCD) are based on emission (or transmission) of three colors of light in specific (but different for every screen) shades of red, green, and blue. This light stimulates the receptors in your eye which are sensitive to certain but different bands of red, green and blue as the display emits, making your brain think it sees a certain color instead of a mix of red green and blue. Printers however, produce color by modifying the reflection of the paper by absorbing light. Their color mixing operates completely differently than displays. When you throw all colors of ink on the paper, you get black (the mixing is said to be subtractive) instead of white as you get in displays (the mixing there is additive). The consequence of this is that in the absence of an infinite number of inks you cannot produce all the colors you can display on a monitor using a printer and vice versa. This can be easily seen if you compare a display's profile to a printer profile in a program such as Colorsync utility (on every mac) or
    Gamut vision. Typically printers cannot reproduce a very large region in the blue but most displays on the other hand cannot make saturated yellows and cyans.
    Here is a flattened XY diagram of a few color spaces and a typical printer profile to illustrate this. Most displays are close to sRGB, but some expensive ones are close to adobeRGB, making the possible difference between print and screen even worse.
    So, when the conversion to the printer's profile is made from your source file (which in Lightroom is in a variant of prophotoRGB), for a lot of colors, the color management routine in the computer software has to make an approximation (the choice of perceptual and relative colorimetric determine what sort of approximation is made). Soft proofing allows you to see the result of this approximation and to correct specific problems with it.

  • How do I turn off color management in Photoshop 5?

    There are three selections, only the first two clickable, in PS5 under Color Management in the Print dialouge:
    Printer Manages Colors
    Photoshop Manages Color
    Separations (grayed out/unclickable)
    Under Printer Manages Colors - there is no option to turn off color management for my Canon 9500 Mark ii
    Under Photoshop Manages Color - there is no option to choose "No Color Management"
    You can chose "No Color Management" in PS3, but not PS5? What happened to this option?
    How is it possible to create a profile from a print of color swatches if I can not turn off color management?
    (I am running Mac OS 10.6.4)
    PS> this is the second time I'm contacting Adobe. First was by phone but I couldn't understand the message left on my voice mail after the phone technician had to ask for help from upper management - the english was so bad. I'm hoping by the written word I'll be able to understand. Please help.

    I have researched the matter a lot and I, 
    along with many others, still have problems with this complicated 
    subject.
    Color management is as simple in theory as Honoring a Source Profile and CONVERTING it to a Target Profile (monitor or printer) for Proofing.
    But yes, we work at the mercy of the rocket scientists who try to dumb an extremely complicated process down so regular folks (like me) can make it work — trouble is I think their approach needs a bit more distilling and common sense sometimes...but it is very doable once you put in the time to figure it out, just follow the CHAIN in your workflow if you're still having problems.
    If you want a "simple button" try staying in sRGB and printing out of Apple Preview app using OEM standard papers matched to your printer and OEM ink set.

  • I Don't Understand Color Management

    I'm a relative newbe, but have been digging into Photoshop CS4 pretty intensely the last several months. All in all I think I'm getting a pretty good handle on it and can pretty much do what I want to do ........ EXCEPT Color Management. No matter how much I read on the subject I still don't have even the basic concepts.
    First off, my tools include a Nikon D90 -> HP Touchsmart Notebook (uncalibrated lcd screen) ->Photoshop CS4 -> a just purchased Epson r2880.
    Let's ignore the Nikon for now and just concentrate on PS and the r2880.
    My color settings in PS are Adobe RGB98 and CYMK US Web coated (SWOP) v2
    Assuming this is OK must I assign a profile to each individual photo, or is that taken care of automatically? What is the purpose of the profile?
    Then when I get ready to print and Color Management is being taken care of by Adobe, do I turn off all color correction in the r2880 or do I use the ICM (which I have downloaded from the web)?
    I experiment with the different settings and one seems to work better sometimes than the other, but not consistently.
    Any help (to include recommended documentation or literature) would be greatly appreciated.

    Thanks very much. Some of this is starting to make sense in a (It Depends on ....) sorta way.
    Going to your analogy, isn't it true when the photographer takes a picture in RAW
    there is no profile, but this is done when opening the image in PS?
    I do use adjustment layers pretty effectively.
    It's when I'm ready to print that it gets confusing. Is the most likely scenario
    to let Adobe of the Printer (with it's premium ICC) handle color management,
    or let Adobe handle color management?
    And if I let Adobe handle color management, is the most likely scenario to have the printer set
    to "No color management" or "ICC color management"?
    I suspect the answer is "Experiment and see", but thus far that has produced
    a mixed bag of tricks.
    A few questions:
    1. Are you doing photography?
    Yes, that's all I'm doing at the Present.
    2. When you print to the Epson - are you trying to proof for a commercial print job, or are you just printing for yourself?
    No, this is strictly a hobby.
    3. Are you supplying files to a commercial printer?
    Again, no.
    4. Have you calibrated and profiled your monitor?
    No, but that's probably going to be one of next projects. My monitor (and tablet) is actually a small 10" lcd on a HP Touchsmart notebook
    Any suggestions as to a low cost solution?
    Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2009 16:17:25 -0600
    From: [email protected]
    To: [email protected]
    Subject: I Don't Understand Color Management
    My basic understanding of CM is Source and Destination.
    Take a picture, for example. The photographer captures the image in RAW and converts this to an RGB image.
    The image is passed on to the designer. If the photographer did their job properly, the image is already tagged with a profile. You can tell this in Photoshop. Beside RGB, there will be *, #, or nothing.
    is very, very bad. This means the image is untagged. Nobody knows what it should look like.
    means the image is tagged with a profile different from your RGB working space. This is fine.
    Nothing means the image is tagged with a profile that matches your RGB working space in Color Settings.
    At any rate, the RGB image is usually referred to as a source image. It can be repurposed to a variety of destination color spaces.
    The next task is proofing the destination. This can be done on the monitor, if it is properly calibrated and profiled. You can also print a proof (that can get a little more complicated, if you have questions please ask).
    For example, you want to know what the image will look like when the commercial printer runs it on his press. Best case scenario is you obtain a CMYK profile from the printer. This is your Proof Color (i.e. Photoshop View: Proof Colors).
    Usually it is best to leave source RGB as source RGB. You can place the RGB image in InDesign, and let InDesign convert to CMYK on output. In other words, there is no reason to convert to CMYK in Photoshop (you should however utilize View: Proof Colors)
    When you convert in Photoshop you damage the image and there is no going back. This means saving a copy. But by avoiding conversions to CMYK in Photoshop, no need to save copies.
    Also by leaving images source RGB, they can be converted to whatever destination you like when you output from InDesign. You could output for a Sheetfed press printing on cover weight coated stock, you could output for a Web press printing on newsprint, or you could even output sRGB for web design. Having source color saves a lot of time, and you're not chasing a bunch of different Photoshop conversions.
    Also note: if you make color adjustments in Photoshop, try to use adjustment layers as these are non-destructive.
    A few questions:
    1. Are you doing photography?
    2. When you print to the Epson - are you trying to proof for a commercial print job, or are you just printing for yourself?
    3. Are you supplying files to a commercial printer?
    4. Have you calibrated and profiled your monitor?
    >

  • Confused about Color Management in CS5 (Photos appearing differently in all other programs)

    I recently noticed this and it's been driving me crazy; when I view photos in Photoshop CS5 they appear significantly lighter/more washed out than when viewed in other programs like Zoombrowser, Digital Photo Professional or just in a regular Windows folder using Filmstrip mode (Windows XP).  When opening the same photo in both CS5 and Zoombrowser and switching back and forth between the two windows the difference is very apparent...for example, one of the photos I compared was of a person in a black shirt -- in CS5 (lighter/washed out) the folds in the shirt were very obvious, but in Zoombrowser (darker, more contrast/saturation) the folds were nearly invisible and it looked like just solid black.  Now, after messing around with the settings in both Photoshop and in Zoombrowser I've found a few ways to get the photos to look the same in the two programs; one way gives them both the lighter/more washed out appearance and another way gives them both the darker appearance with more contrast and saturation.  My problem is that I'm not sure which view is accurate.
    I use a NEC MultiSync LCD1990SXi monitor with SpectraView II calibration software and calibrate it every 2 weeks using these calibration settings (screenshot): http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/8826/settingsx.jpg
    In the SpectraView II Software under Preferences there's an option that says "Set as Windows Color Management System Monitor Profile - Automatically selects and associates the generated ICC monitor profile with the Color Management System (CMS)."  This option is checked.  Also, when I open the Windows' Color Management window there's only one option displayed, which is "LCD1990SXi #######" (the ####### represents my monitor's serial number).
    I assume the above settings are all correct so far, but I'm not sure about the rest.
    Here are my current default Color Settings in CS5 (screenshot): http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/666/photoshopcolorsettings.jpg
    Changing these settings around doesn't seem to make the photo appear much different.  However, when I go to Edit -> Assign Profile, then click off of "Working RGB: sRGB IEC61966-2.1" and instead click Profile and select "LCD1990SXi ####### 2011-06-21 18-30 D65 2.20" from the drop-down menu, the picture becomes darker with more contrast and saturation and matches the picture in Zoombrowser.  Also, if I select "Adobe RGB (1998)" from the drop-down menu it's very similar in terms of increased darkness and contrast but the saturation is higher than with the LCD1990SXi setting.  Another way I've found to make the image equally dark with increased contrast and saturation is to go to View -> Proof Setup -> Custom and then click the drop-down menu next to "Device to Simulate" and select "LCD1990SXi ####### 2011-06-21 18-30 D65 2.20" again.
    Alternatively, to make both images equally light and washed out I can go to Zoombrowser -> Tools -> Preferences and check the box next to "Color Management: Adjust colors of images using monitor profile."  This makes the image in Zoombrowser appear just like it does in CS5 by default.
    Like I said, I'm confused as to which setting is the accurate one (I'm new to Color Management in general so I apologize for my ignorance on the subject).
    It would seem that assigning the LCD1990SXi profile in CS5 would be the correct choice in order to match the monitor calibration given the name of the profile but the "Adjust colors of images using monitor profile" option in Zoombrowser sounds like it would do the same thing as well.  Also, I've read that Photoshop is a color managed software whereas Zoombrowser and Windows Picture and Fax Viewer are not which makes me think that maybe the lighter/washed out version seen in Photoshop is correct.  So which version (light or dark) is the accurate one that I should use to view and edit my photos?  Thanks in advance for any help or info.

    Sorry for the late reply;
    But before we go there or make any assumptions, it's important for
    you to determine whether you're seeing consistent color in your
    color-managed applications and only inconsistent color in those that are
    not color-managed.  For that you'll need to do a little research to see
    if the applications in which you're seeing darker colors have
    color-management capability (and whether it is enabled).
    I opened the same picture in 7 different applications and found that the 6 of the 7 displayed the photo equally dark with equally high contrast when compared to the 7th application (CS5).  The other 6 applications were Zoombrowser EX, Digital Photo Professional, Windows Picture and Fax Viewer, Quicktime PictureViewer, Microsoft Office Picture Manager and Firefox.
    However, at least two of these programs offer color management preferences and, when used, display the photo (from what I can tell) exactly the same as Photoshop CS5's default settings.  The two programs are two Canon programs: Zoombrowser EX and Digital Photo Professional.  Here's the setting that needs to be selected in Zoombrowser in order to match up with CS5 (circled in red):
    And here's the setting in Digital Photo Professional that needs to be selected in order to match up with CS5 (again, circled in red):
    *Note: When the option above "Monitor Profile" is selected ("Use the OS settings") the image is displayed exactly the same as when the monitor profile is selected.  It's only when sRGB is selected that it goes back to the default darker, more contrasty version.
    So with the red-circled options selected, all three programs (CS5, ZB, DPP) display the images the same way; lighter and more washed out.  What I'm still having trouble understanding is if that ligher, more washed out display is the accurate one or not...I've read several tutorials for all three programs which only make things more confusing.  One of the tutorials says to always use sRGB if you want accurate results and *never* to use Monitor Profile and another says that, if you're using a calibrated monitor, you should always select Monitor Profile under the color management settings...so I'm still lost, unfortunately.
    What I also don't understand is why, when the monitor profile is selected in CS5, the image is displayed in the dark and contrasty way that the other programs display it as by default but when the monitor profile is selected in Digitial Photo Professional it displays it in the lighter, more washed out way that CS5 displays it using CS5's default settings (sRGB).  Why would selecting the monitor profile in DPP display the photo the same way as when sRGB is selected in Photoshop?  And vice versa...why would selecting the monitor profile in Photoshop display the photo the same way as when sRGB is selected in DPP?
    I feel like I'm missing something obvious here...which I probably am.  Again, I'm very new to this stuff so pardon my ignorance on the topic.
    By the way, I find that the way that the non-color managed programs (Windows Picture and Fax Viewer et al.) display the photos is more aesthetically pleasing to the eye than the duller, more washed out display that CS5 gives the photos, but ultimately what I want to see in these programs (especially PS5 where I'll be doing the editing) is the accurate representation of the actual photo itself...i.e. what it's supposed to look like and not a darker (or lighter) variant of it.
    So just to reiterate my questions:
    Why does selecting Monitor Profile under the color management settings in DPP give the same display results as the default sRGB profile in CS5 and vice versa?  (CS5 with monitor profile selected having the same display results as DPP with the sRGB profile selected)
    When using CS5 with it's default color management settings (sRGB), using DPP with the Monitor Profile selected, and using Zoombrowser EX with "Adjust color of images using monitor profile" selected this results in all three programs displaying the same lighter, washed-out images...is this lighter, more washed-out display of the images shown in these three programs the accurate one?
    I noticed when opening an image in Firefox it had the same darker, contrasty look as the other non-color managed applications had.  Assuming that the CS5 default settings are accurate, does this mean that if I edit a photo in CS5, save it, and upload it to the internet that other people who are viewing that image online will see it differently than how it's supposed to look (i.e. in a non-color-managed way?)  If so, this would seem to indicate that they'd see a less-than-flattering version of the photo since if their browser naturally displays images as darker and more contrasty and I added more darkness and contrast to the image in CS5, they'd be seeing a version of the photo that's far too dark and probably wouldn't look very good.  Is this something I have to worry about as well?
    I apologize for the lengthy post; I do tend to be a bit OCD about these things...it's a habit I picked up once I realized I'd been improperly editing photos on an  incorrectly calibrated monitor for years and all that time and effort had been spent editing photos in a certain way that looked good on my incorrectly calibrated monitor but looked like crap on everyone else's screen, so the length and detail of this post comes from a desire to not repeat similar mistakes by editing photos the wrong way all over again.  Again, thanks in advance for all the help, it's greatly appreciated!

  • Suspected Flaw in Firefox 35 Color Management Behavior

    I hope I can keep this concise, but bear with me if my confusion causes me to include some extraneous info. The info below is what I think is required for someone else to fully understand the issue.
    BACKGROUND:
    - NECPA271W wide gamut monitor in dual monitor setup with a standard gamut Samsung 245BW
    - Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit
    - Nvidia Quadro K4000
    - Latest versions of FireFox (v35 32-bit), IE11 (11.0.9600.17498 updated to 11.0.15 32-bit) & Avant (Ultimate 2015 build 7, in use for testing because it incorporates the rendering engines of 3 major browsers, IE v 11.0.9600.17496, FireFox v 34.05.5464, & Chrome v39.0.2172.95)
    - i1Display Pro (not the NEC SVSensor version), SpectraView II, NEC Multiprofiler & i1 Profiler
    - Both monitors are calibrated and profiled. The NEC is calibrated using SVII, but since that software only supports NEC monitors, the 245BW has to be done using i1Profiler software that comes with the i1Display Pro. SVII is only capable of generating v2 ICC profiles, i1 Profiler is capable of v2 & v4, and recommends v4. Nevertheless, I think this entire bullet point is irrelevant to the effect I'm observing.
    - I've lately started selling some of my photography on a fine art website.  As a result I started digging deeper into how those images are viewed by others & subsequently printed. Images optimized in sRGB for the best possible display results across a widely varied viewer base are not going to give the same results as images that are soft-proofed and optimized for specific media/printer/ink combinations. This is especially true of my images which tend to lean in the direction of being more heavily saturated & wider gamut
    - I've been exhaustively over the info here COLOR MANAGEMENT PHOTOSHOP CC CS6 Basic ColorManagement Theory ICC Profiles Color Spaces Calibrated Monitor Professional… & here http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/  among many others.
    I had reached a point where I thought I understood things pretty well, but now I'm not so sure again Here's the problem:
    I followed the guidance and info on how to set FireFox for FULL color management  (value 1 with associated monitor profile) that allows the handling of non-tagged images and web page elements, http://cameratico.com/guides/firefox-color-management/. Upon restarting Firefox with the updated configuration, I return to the test at http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/  The last two tests there are designed to show a) how much wider your display gamut is than sRGB, and b) how the browser handles untagged images and elements.
    The behavior I observe is different from the behavior I expect! Specifically, setting FIrefox to color management value 1 and telling it my monitor profile causes Firefox to display the sRGB tagged images as if they were not tagged. With the default value 2/no monitor profile, I can see a difference between the display of sRGB tagged images and either the ProPhoto RGB tagged image or the untagged sRBG & untagged CSS elements. I would expect that the change to value 1 with monitor profile should have no impact on the display of tagged images and elements, and yet that switch ONLY causes a  change in the display behavior of the tagged images it shouldn't have affected, and I can no longer see a difference between the various images because everything is fully saturated
    A marked up screen capture showing the comparative behaviors between the various applications and browsers would probably be worth more than the proverbial 1000 words, I'm new here & haven't figured that part out yet, but will post this as is while I work on that.
    Can anybody replicate the behavior I observe? Is anybody spotting an error in my thinking?
    TIA
    Randy
    *EDIT - I have annotated a screen shot comparing the results across 4 browsers. The screenshot has an embedded Adobe RGB profile which best represents the effects & changes that I was/am seeing but may not be preserved if posted here. It may be best to download and view in CS6 so as to not introduce any additional confusion arising from which browser YOU may be using :-) If needed the full res 2560x1440 version is available, but scaling to meet the forum limits of 900x900 makes the text unreadable. Can anyone suggest a means of supplying the full res file with the embedded profile retained?

    twenty_one wrote:
    Firefox will use the profile for the main display. It does not support a dual monitor setup. If you move FF to the secondary display, it will still use the primary display's profile.
    There is a Firefox Add-On called Profile Switcher that allows using multiple monitor profiles. You will need to setup a Firefox user profile for each monitor:
    https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Multiple_Firefox_Profiles
    After installing Profile Switcher Add-On you will find a new entry in the FF File menu 'Open Profile Manager,' which can be used to create and manage the new user profiles (see screenshots below).
    You can then setup a Firefox Sync account to keep the user profiles synchronized or do this manually using Copy & Paste. I was concerned that Firefox Sync would over-write the configuration data for the monitor profile, but it doesn't. I leave 'gfx.color_management.display_profile' blank on the user profile for the primary NEC 272W monitor, and add the path for the monitor profile on the user profile for my standard gamut secondary display. Here's what I see when launching FF:
    After installing the Profile Switcher Add-On you'll see two new entries in the FF File menu that allow you to manage and launch other FF user profiles as separate browser instances.
    It works fine on my Windows 7 system and should also work on Mac OS X systems and Windows 8.x.

  • Color Management Module In Photoshop

    Question:  A color management module is the software that defines the mathematical manipulations by which color conversions are made?

    Thanks for your quick reply.
    From: ronzie99 <[email protected]>
    To: IronEyesWally <[email protected]>
    Sent: Thursday, December 8, 2011 1:09 PM
    Subject: Color Management Module In Photoshop
    Re: Color Management Module In Photoshop created by ronzie99 in Photoshop Elements - View the full discussion
    There are different types of icc\icm profiles used in color management.
    First is the color workspace. PSE is by default set to create files in the color space embedded in the image opened and if not then the default color space of your choosing. The type of color space describes the gamut limitations of that color space.
    Next are device specific color profiles. These are the display and printer profiles but can also exist for input devices. These profiles serve as tables to fit the measured characteristicsof the device to the color space requireed. For output devices there are Rendering Intents that can be chosen to determine how the limitations of a device can be best interpolated to fit the color space of an image  into the limitations of the device for best appearance.
    A practical way to think of a display to output workflow think of the color space situated between the displayed image and the output device with the color space in the middle defining limitations as a standard. The devices profiles are then measured against the standard color profile to create corrections or translation table so they react appropropriately to present the image on the display for the output device target profile in an attempt to get a 'what you see is what you get' envirionment for the specific devices used.
    You need to create via calibration either by you (better) or insttall from the manufacturer a profile for the display. This matches your display device to the 'standard' profile. If you go to print then you'll need to install a printer profile (which varies by ink and paper type) either OEM or from paper suppliers or created by a measuring device you can purchase if you go 'rogue' regrding non-OEM inks and papers.
    PSE does not have a soft-proof mode built in like Photoshop. It does have a setup, though, where it will let you assign every time you print an output profile that you select if you want PSE to directly manage the printer for tonality and color, in which case in the printer driver itself you disable color management only leaving the driver to descrive the image quality and surface type of the paer chosen and choosing none or leaving icm unchecked in the printer driver. The profile is selected in the PSE printer driver under advanced.
    Soft proof mode is where the display translation is further manipulated to approximate the printer output. This can happen because you have calibrated your monitor to a standard and a printer tothat same standard. I have an add-on for PSE 10 called Elements +  that in addition to lots of filters and effects adds some soft-proofing capability and curve color level adjustments to PSE. http://www.simplephotoshop.com/elementsplus/index.htm
    In practical terms that is the function of color management.
    BTW: The defacto color space for the Internet web browsers is sRGB. Use this when correcting color for web distribution.
    Replies to this message go to everyone subscribed to this thread, not directly to the person who posted the message. To post a reply, either reply to this email or visit the message page: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4071890#4071890
    To unsubscribe from this thread, please visit the message page at http://forums.adobe.com/message/4071890#4071890. In the Actions box on the right, click the Stop Email Notifications link.
    Start a new discussion in Photoshop Elements by email or at Adobe Forums
    For more information about maintaining your forum email notifications please go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/2936746#2936746.

  • Settings in color management VISTA

    http://s54.radikal.ru/i143/0808/c2/e56c95257436.jpg
    I am using a new Dell3007WFP und NVIDIA GeForce 7600 GT with Windows Vista. Images display with a yellow tinge when I open them in Photoshop CS3 (or Windows Photo Gallery).
    They do not have the yellow tinge when viewed on a Windows XP box or other tools on Vista (Corel Snapfire, Windows file browser).
    The problem is clearly illustrated at http://s54.radikal.ru/i143/0808/c2/e56c95257436.jpg
    In the screenshot the same image is open in Photoshop, MS Paint, Windows Photo Gallery, and the Windows file browser.
    New monitor profile I make with ColorVision Spyder2.
    Interesting is when I proof colors in PS and to choose Monitor RGB colosr then is ok.
    The problem is clearly illustrated at
    http://www.imgup.ru/image-1219259414a58301a32cbd51cab30df38423af6fb1
    Please help! This problem is driving me insane.
    Juris

    thank you, g ballard!
    but i don`t want reed all links ....
    but I think I have found one (meanwhile) solution!
    in color management window as my defoult ICC profile I choose sRGB IEC61966-2.1.(I hope it is OK !?)
    AND leave there my monitor profile
    when I restart PC ColorVisionStartup give me notice --> can not load this monitor profile. Please select another profile.(1168)
    then I manualy choose in --->ColorVision---> ProfileChooser my calibrated monitor profile... and UPSAAAaaa all is OK! (at least I think so!)
    clearly illustrated at
    http://s56.radikal.ru/i154/0808/92/123c1a16fb3d.jpg

  • The workings of Photoshop's color management

    Hey guys!
    I've been spending some time researching and trying to understand the workings of Photoshop's color management and come across a lot of fuzzy and contradicting information, particularly regarding the Proof Setup. I think I have figured some of it out but (for the ease of my sleep) I figured to ask a couple of direct questions just to be sure. I guess it's more of a curiosity thing.
    I'm on a Mac OS X 10.8, Photoshop CS6, calibrated standard gamut monitor, working in sRGB for web.
    1) From what I gathered, to achieve as precise color as possible on my display, all I have to do is set Working Space to sRGB or have images with embeded sRGB tag and have my calibrated monitor ICC profile loaded in the OS X. In that way, all the images and colours in Photoshop will adhere to sRGB and my calibration profile will make sure my monitor is actually displaying correct sRGB colours (to the best of it's ability anyways). Correct?
    2) I have come across a lot of 'quick tips' where people mention using the Proof Setup > Monitor RGB as a way to monitor colours for web and then I've seen people saying that's not right. From what I understand, the Monitor RGB function strips the embeded tag and ignores the working space of the image, instead showing you the RGB values in the 'native' colour space of the monitor, which in my case would be sRGB-ish. Kinda bypassing Photoshop's color management, but not the display calibration profile. Correct?
    3) When viewing an sRGB tagged image, toggling the Proof Setup: Monitor RGB on and off has absolutely no effect. Am I right in assuming that it's because the sRGB tag is getting "switched off" but since the monitor is standard gamut, the native color space is still sRGB?
    What I find weird is when I change the display profile in OS X from my calibrated one to, for example, a Generic RGB, toggling the Proof Setup: Monitor RGB has effect - the image brightness changes visibly. If my assumption above was correct, it shouldn't happen, right? Hence my confusion.
    Thanks!
    Kris

    In terms of Calibration, it's useful to keep this in mind: Calibration ideally places a device in a known, desried and repeatable state. In terms of a display, the 'ideal' calibration for most is one in which the display and the print produce a visual match. YMMV a great deal! You can calibrate a display such it doesn't produce a match quite easily, getting calibration to produce the match takes work! If any of the targets aim points (White Point, Luminance and contrast ratio) is less than ideal, the calibration doesn't produce a visual match. See: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/why_are_my_prints_too_dark.shtml
    In theory, if you didn't need to match the display to a print, you don't have to even calibrate the display for an ICC workflow. But you should <g>. You could simply profile it's current behavior which would work in an ICC workflow because you built a profile that reflects the current display conditions. The display will change over time because a display, unlike say an Epson Pro printer, is unstable and it's behavior will change over time. You need to calibrate or get that display back to it's original condition ideally. With the Epson, it's very, very stable (although I'd point out, not necessarily calibrated ideally, if we had more control over the native driver, we could 'adjust' or calibrate a more linear behavior). So with an Epson, you build a profile on top of the less than ideal driver conditions but the driver and the rest of the system is super stable and consistent. You simply need a profile to define that behavior and you're done. The printer and inks are very stable so you could also in theory place a different driver or RIP and calibrate better behavior and profile.
    I'd forget the 'calibrate' a display to sRGB on a modern LCD unit short of perhaps an Eizo or NEC SpectraView system. The sRGB color space is based upon a theoretical CRT display circa 1994 or so, with very defined primaries and conditions. There is no real 'standard' to how one can and should define the display, especially if you want to visually match a print next to the display. The illuminant used to view the print plays a huge role! So providing one set of calibration aim points and expecting all displays to produce a match is pie in the sky. Might be close, might be spot on (I wouldn’t depend on that), might be way off. All explained in the URL above. If one setting worked properly, we'd all use that one setting and calibration products wouldn’t vary from only a few presets (kind of uselss) to products like Eizo and NEC which provide a huge number of options for setting white point as just one example.

  • LR3 color management issues

    Alright, so I'm having some trouble with color spaces and am at the point I'm seeing red and just want to smash my computer. I feel like I understand the basics of color management but for some reason I can't seem to get things to behave. I know certain programs are color managed and can handle different color spaces, and some are not. I will also note that my monitor has been calibrated using a Spyder3Pro.
    I like working with sRGB simply because I get the same result on most places on the internet (I know I'm losing gamut but I really don't print too much so it's not a big deal). So I know that LR operates in ProPhoto RGB, the biggest of the main RGB color spaces (sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB) and as such shows photos with far more color than can be represented by sRGB. However, whenever I export a photo from LR (be it to JPEG in any of the color spaces, or to edit in PS CS5), the colors are always far more muted than what I see in LR. I have checked the settings in CS5 and even opened the RAW file (with the .xmp editing info) directly in CS5 in ProPhotoRGB and the colors aren't even close to what I see in LR. Additionally I used LR to export the file to JPEG in sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB, and when those three files are opened in Photoshop, they look virtually identical. There are minute changes in the histogram between the three files, but they all look the same. However, they appear different when viewed in my browser (Firefox), even though I have set it to color manage. I did notice that there was no color space listed when I looked at the file properties in the Details tab, but the color profile is clearly being embedded as PS asks me if I want to view the image in the working space or the embedded color space of the image. What is going on here?
    Screenshot of the same file in LR and PS, being opened in PS using the external editing feature of LR (screenshot pasted and saved in sRGB in PS):
    The file in PS converted to sRGB and saved in PS:
    The file saved in sRGB from LR:
    The file saved in Adobe RGB from LR:
    The file saved in ProPhoto RGB from LR:
    Additional information that may be useful:
    Lightroom 3.6
    Camera RAW 6.6
    Photoshop CS5.1
    Firefox 16.0.1
    Monitor calibrated with Spyder3Pro
    Windows 7 Professional 64-bit
    Thanks,
    Reed
    EDIT: After further investigation, it appears that Firefox is treating these images as images without a color space, yet somehow Photoshop and Windows Photo Viewer recognize the color space. So I think I have two concerns: 1) why are my photos drastically different between LR and PS, and 2) how are the images being saved from LR lacking the color space information needed by Firefox yet still retaining it for PS?

    ReedJ12 wrote:
    It must be embedding the profiles somewhere because when I open the JPEGs in CS5, it recognizes that they're not sRGB. I made these simply by going in LR and clicking on the standard Export button. No external plugins have been installed.
    Reed
    In that case, were the images in the original post, the result of a "save" operation inside CS5? If so, could they have lost their colourspace tagging at that point, due to something in your Photoshop JPG saving settings (or your "save for web and devices" settings)?
    That could be quickly confirmed by uploading a (say) ProPhoto exported image, for comparison, as directly exported from LR - that is, which has never been into Photoshop.
    You could also compare this youself against the version you uploaded, side by side in PS - if the one that has just come fresh from LR still has its colourspace tagging, and the other has lost its colourspace tagging, then even though the RGB numbers inside the image may be identical, PS will be interpreting the meaning of the numbers differently in each case - and will therefore display them as different, just as colourspace-aware browsers such as IE8 are doing, for other people viewing your examples online.

Maybe you are looking for