Color profile confusion

I'm using Windows 7 home premium, Lightroom 5.2 RC, Photoshop CS6. After working on an image in Lightroom, I went to Photoshop to do some finishing. In the process I wanted to convert the profile from prophoto to sRGB. I expected to see the choice of sRGB_IEC61966-2-1, but the selection was eSRGB, and the other one wasn't even on the list. So I did a Google search and found sRGB_IEC61966-2-1_no_black_scaling.icc but I can't figure out where to install it or even if I need to install it. I know, this isn't a Photoshop forum. But I wondered if anyone here could advise me as to what to do.
My printed images seem to match fine and so do the prints I get back from a local lab and from MyPublisher. So I'm a little confused. Any ideas?

Hi Jim I'm also using PS CS6 on Windows 7 64 bit. Color profiles are in this folder:
C:\Windows\System32\spool\drivers\color
Below is what my PS CS6 Edit> Convert To Profle> Destination Space proifle list looks like. I have an sRGB IEC61966-2-1 profile, which shows up in the Windows folder as sRGB.icc with sRGB IEC61966-2.1 'Profile Description' name using ExifTool GUI.
Here's Adobe's color profile download link, but no sRGB profile here so PS is using the Windows installed sRGB profile (sRGB.ICC in the above folder)
http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/detail.jsp?ftpID=4075
At bottom of above of the profile list in the above page it has this link:
http://www.color.org/index.xalter
....sRGB v4, and v2 profiles with and without black scaling here:
http://www.color.org/srgbprofiles.xalter
Are you confused yet...I am!
http://ninedegreesbelow.com/photography/srgb-profile-comparison.html

Similar Messages

Confused about color profile support in PNG

NOTE -- you have to hover over the image to see the real images. The images embedded in the webpage have their profiles stripped -- just like photoshop does! Interesting.
I ask a similar question on this before, but couldn't give a satisfactory demonstration of how photoshop doesn't support color profiles in png's.
But now I have a great one.
Picture A: this is with the correct color profile and displays correctly in firefox and probably other browsers -- also displays correctly on windows desktop and in large-icon view.
Ok, anyone who doesn't believe me, grab that image and try to read it into photoshop...
I do, and get no warning on profile mismatch like I do on jpg's or tiff's:
photoshop strips the existing profile and adds sRGB which isn't the correct profile.
This is how photoshop transforms good colors into bad:
Completly screwed up.
I have had multiple people notice how my png saved images from photoshop had "off" or bad colors -- usually washed out in comparison w/my monitor profile.
I can get 'ok' results if I flatten the image and *convert* my existing profile to sRGB -- and I usually get
something that looks 'acceptable'...though the jpg's render in accurate color.
Basically, photoshop can't read or write png web images. and maintain color fidelity unless they have no profile. Even if they have an sRGB profile, I usually get washed out looking pics if I don't strip it but let adobe convert it.
In googling for my own problem, I found references to this problem in Adobe Photoshop going back to 2002.
Why does adobe refuse to fix this? It's horrible.
They could fix it with a file plugin for existing CS5-6 users, but it really needs to get fixed and Adobe needs to stop ignoring this problem.
:-( I find this extra depressing because I prefer to distribute my pictures losslessly in png, but with photoshop, I'm left with lossy jpegs to get accurate color reproduction.

How did the SFW thing even come up?? When I embed profiles in jpg and tiff, I do it as part of the File Save or File Save As dialog. I can choose what profile to save it with -- and I usually save it with my currently calibrated monitor profile -- as that color profile is what was used to create the picture. Why would I want to convert them to some other profile?? Only thing I have needed to convert have been PNG's because it doesn't embed my monitor profile in the PNG the same way jpg and tiff do.
If it did, png's would look the same as jpgs and tiffs... but the jpgs and tiffs have the full depth of color and look the same as they do in PS. png's look washed out because -- it's been my belief that PS is not storing my profile in the png, but setting a bit in the file to use the sRGB profile.
AFAIK, PNG provided for a sRGB profile-compat bit -- so images that were compat w/that profile could just set a bit rather than including a profile. I see no evidence that PS is saving my monitor profile with the PNG.
My 'settings' for RGB are to convert to working RGB profile which is my monitor profile.
I do have it set to ask me abou profile mismatches on opening or pasting.
Since I don't get a 'this document has a different color profile than the working space'
message when I edit most png's, I assume it has none. Thus from my settings
it should autoconvert it to my monitor profile and save that on save -- which seems to be what happens when I save as jpg or tiff (or I can check off the box to save profile...but I usually don't).

Confused by embedded color profile vs. working space

If you know that the destination of a photo is ultimately going to need the sRGB color profile (uploading book to blurb), and you are going from Lightroom to Photoshop ("edit in Photoshop CS5") do you "Convert document's colors to working space" of sRGB?
This is what I have been doing, but when the photo is saved (in Photoshop) and then I view it in Lightroom, the photo looks completely different & gives me Exposure warnings.
Is this because Lightroom is showing me the photo with the color profile of Pro Photo RGB?
If yes, do I leave the photo alone, knowing that it should print correctly by Blurb &/or view correctly on a website?
Thanks for any help you can give me!
Laura

The "working space" is the colour space a program uses internally. Lightroom always uses Pro Photo RGB, there's no choice. With Photoshop you can choose Working Space:
I'd recommend ProPhoto, if only because that's what LR uses, so it avoids any change of working space. I would also choose "Preserve..." in the options below, and check all the "Ask When..." options (so it warns you when something funny happens).
If you save in Photoshop, and then re-import into LR, and it looks different, then some colour space mismatch might have happened. The problem is likely to be in Photoshop (as there aren't any options in LR you can get wrong!) Make sure the Photoshop "Color Management Policies" are as I've got them above. It shouldn't matter what colour space the image is in when you import back into LR, so long as there's an embedded profile. The embedded profile merely indicates in what colour space the image is. LR takes note of the profile, and when you work on the image in Develop Module, it converts internally to ProPhoto RGB (but LR never alters files except metadata - if you import an sRGB jpeg then it stays sRGB - LR converts to ProPhoto RGB only for internal use).
When you save the image in Photoshop, if you want it in sRGB:
either use Save for Web... (and make sure "Convert to sRGB" and "Embed profile" are checked)
or use Edit... Convert to Profile (not Assign Profile) and then save.
Does that help?

Bridge doesn't recognize color profiles

Dear Adobe community,
I'm using Adobe Bridge CS5.1 (4.1.0.54) and Illustrator CS5.1 (15.1.0), and I'm experiencing a very confusing and disturbing color management problem between these two applications. In short, for some unknown reason Bridge doesn't seem to respect or simply cannot read CMYK color profiles that I've applied to an artwork within Illustrator, but rather labels the file as "Untagged" and displays it with clearly desaturated colors. To illustrate the problem I've created some screenshots having Bridge on the left hand side and Illustrator on the right displaying the same illustration with various color profiles applied. That is, in each case I assigned different color profile to the image in Illustrator, saved the file and took the screenshot of Bridge and Illustrator both displaying the image. Now if you look closely then perhaps you notice that the only time I got a visual match between these applications was when I switched the file to a RGB mode within Illustrator. But even then Bridge did not recognized the correct color profile but interpreted it as "Untagged". Here are the screens:
Bridge "Untagged" vs. Illustrator "U.S. Web Coated":
Bridge "Untagged" vs. Illustrator "Coated FOGRA39":
Bridge "Untagged" vs. Illustrator "Don't Color Manage This Document":
Bridge "Untagged" vs. Illustrator "Adobe RGB":
Hope you could see the difference from these tiny images. Looking from my monitor, I can tell you for sure that they are definitely off, except the RGB versions of the illustration. This made me surmise that perhaps Bridge can only display Working RGB profiles correctly and not anything else.
Here's also my color settings, just in case…
So... Why is that??? Why are these applications showing me different results while my color settings are supposed to be "Synchronized"? Is there a way to fix this? I have tried to play around with the settings and looked for a solution in the web but to no avail. Could you please help me to find a soulution to this disturbing problem?
All the best,
Juhani

You may have used the broken global Purge Cache command in Bridge Preferences, or the cache is otherwise corrupted. Try Purging the Cache through the Tools menu in Bridge for each folder. Tools > Cache > Purge cache for 'foldername'.

Embedded Color Profile is Lost When Content is Published to Web or Dragging Image Window on Desktop

Hello, Everyone. I have a question that I have struggled to crack on my own to no avail. I hope someone here can help.
I am trying to publish some images to the web using color corrected monitors, RAW format, and a color checker passport to create a perfeect color profile. Here are the technical details and my workflow.
Camera: Canon Rebel EOS Xsi
Format: RAW + L
Color Space: sRGB
Color Checker: X-Rite ColorChecker Passport
Monitor Calibrator: Spyder4 Pro, fully updated software
Computer: Lenovo T420 ThinkPad
Second monitor: Samsung LED SyncMaster SA350 (NVIDIA)
Photoshop: v12.1 x64 (CS5.5)
Photoshop Color Settings: Custom North America Web/Internet
RGB: sRGB IEC61966-2.1
CMYK: U.S. Web Coated (SWOP) v2
Gray: Gray GAmma 2.2
Spot: Dot Grain 20%
Policies
RGB: Preserve Embedded Profiles
CMYK: Preserve Embedded Profiles
Gray: Preserve Embedded Profiles
After importing the image into Photoshop, I make sure the RAW space is set to sRGB IEC6 1966-2.1
Use the eyedropper to select a neutral color one step away from pure white on the RAW image of the color checker, create and set the custom white balance.
set the white balance
Export the image as a DNG
Load the DNG into the X-Rite ColorChecker Passport software to create a color profile
Back to Photoshop
Open the RAW file
Set the white balance to the custom profile created above
Set the color profile created with X-Rite
Open the color-corrected image in Photoshop (see color setting above)
Save as JPEG
Publish
First, everything seems to go great throughout this entire process, until I see the image on the Web: LINK. Once published, the image has a very noticible golden-yellow tint to it. The color-corrected image looks great on both color-calibrated monitors, in RAW and JPEG. Absolutely perfect. After noticing the ugly yellow tint in the image I posted to the Web, however, I became aware of a couple more weird things.
1) When the JPEG was open in Photoshop and I moved the window that contained the image around on my second monitor, the image immediately took on that golden-yellow tint: you can see a screen shot of the color corrected image on my Samsung (bottom) and the yellow version of the same image created when I drag the window around on the Samsung (top) HERE.
2) When opening the X-Rite software, I got a warning saying that the laptop monitor had been calibrated, but that the Samsung had not. I got this error even if I calibrated the Samsung monitor right before using X-Rite. Also, the monitor is definitely calibrated, because the images look great, and the colors match what I see on the laptop.
3) Recently, I noticed that when waking my computer from sleep, the Samsung monitor no longer holds its Datacolor (Spyder4) calibration.
I thought the problem I was having might be due to the monitor, for the reasons stated above. However, I later noticed that when I open the color-corrected JPEG with the default Windows image viewer, it retains the color correction settings. The image looks fantastic, and doesn't lose it's color profile when I drag the window around. Also, there seems to be less color loss in the Word documents and PDFs I included this image in: LINK.
I checked this with several more images, and the results are the exact same. I scoured the Web as best I could, but my problem seems to be pretty unique. Does anyone have an idea what might be causing this?
Thank you!

Thank you, twenty_one, for taking the time to read my post and put up a reply. I am going to rebuild my question and post it again here. But first, to answer some of your points:
1. A raw file has no color space, until it's opened into one in the raw converter. So this is controlled in ACR, not the camera.
I just wanted to be as thorough as possible. One of the steps I took was to set the Color Space setting in my camera to sRGB:
2. White balance has no bearing whatsoever on camera profiles. A profile is not for white balancing, it's to account for the spectral distribution of the light, which is something else. You make the profile and assign it in ACR, then you white balance for processing.
I know. I wasn't talking about white balance in my camera. I set the white balance here:
I grabbed the color for setting the WB here:
3. If you get a message about monitor calibration upon opening the camera calibration software, something is seriously confused. The two have nothing to do with each other. No relation whatsoever.
Camera calibration software?
4. A corrupted monitor profile will only show up in Photoshop and other color managed software. Other applications that are not color managed will not use the profile and are not affected. So find out which apps are and which aren't before drawing any conclusions.
Agreed. That's partly what I am trying to get help with.
5. Your links don't work, and in any case clicking on links is something most people including myself dislike. It's much better to insert screenshots in the post, by using the camera icon in the reply box.
I'm new to this forum, so this is helpful to know. This image shows the color-corrected image (bottom) on my Samsung. It looks exactly the same in the same window on my laptop monitor. When I move that window around on my Samsung screen, it turns gold (top). The image, when posted to the web, looks *similar* to that gold color.
So let's say I only use Photoshop on my laptop, which is not displaying any colors. Do you think the golden hue problem will go away?

Color profiles for I photo books

Is there a desired color profile to use for printing books with i photo
My images are currently adobe-rgb. jpegs brought in from CS
When I print the images thru CS they look great.
When i print them thru I photo book or the PDF they look very dark and muddy...and would assume the same of the book printing online.
any ideas on how to get the best print.
Is there a color profile availabe from the online book printers or are we just winging it
Also tried converting one page to S-RGB Still Muddy / dark thru i photo book
and PDF Print. And just fine thru CS
Any Ideas??
Thank you

I guess I am going to throw caution to the wind and see what happens.
Only one way to find out, Right
Though I did go back and lighten my images. Also
Ran color synch utility, which fixed 11 corrupt color profiles.(none of the 11 profiles pertained to i photo)
I guess I am afraid to use pref setter,, to set the key embed color profile.
Confused as to what that means??? Does that mean that all my CS Adobe-RGB jpegs will keep their color profile???
Also implanted one image as an SRGB vs the rest which will all be AdobeRGB
Oddly my color management in CS is almost Flawless. Yet, get me out of CS and I am completely lost!!!! Complicated stuff
Toad, I did want to pass on that AdobeRGB 1998 is a much more robust color profile then SRGB especially when it come to printing on Epson. It might be worth experimenting with and if you really want to get into it there is also
Pro photo RGB which is Huge color space, but a beast to work with
Here is a link
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml
Will report back on my book
TF

Choosing Color Profiles for Images Created on Film

I just finished sending feedback to Adobe on one of its tutorials. The following is a copy of my message explaining my present predicament.
<< I have scanned film negatives and positive film transparencies dating back to the 1950's .I was the creator of most of these images but I do not remember the make or model of the cameras I was using at any point in time prior to 1974 and they all lack metadata. Prior to 2000 I used iPhoto and PS Elements for scanning, toning and development. Thus I can only guess what color profile I should use. I want to create TIFFS that will serve a dual purpose: exporting two formats, one for electronic sharing and the other for printing. On the Adobe CC, if I guess wrong, LR 5.6 64bit crashes immediately. Prior stand alone versions of LR and CS6 let you know that you had a color inconsistency, but they did not crash when you had made a wrong choice between srgb and ProPhoto. ACC gives me more options, but no warnings unless I am missing something your Help Files should contain.>>
David Krupp Win7 64bit
Chicago, IL 773-281-6278. [email protected]

I guess I am going to throw caution to the wind and see what happens.
Only one way to find out, Right
Though I did go back and lighten my images. Also
Ran color synch utility, which fixed 11 corrupt color profiles.(none of the 11 profiles pertained to i photo)
I guess I am afraid to use pref setter,, to set the key embed color profile.
Confused as to what that means??? Does that mean that all my CS Adobe-RGB jpegs will keep their color profile???
Also implanted one image as an SRGB vs the rest which will all be AdobeRGB
Oddly my color management in CS is almost Flawless. Yet, get me out of CS and I am completely lost!!!! Complicated stuff
Toad, I did want to pass on that AdobeRGB 1998 is a much more robust color profile then SRGB especially when it come to printing on Epson. It might be worth experimenting with and if you really want to get into it there is also
Pro photo RGB which is Huge color space, but a beast to work with
Here is a link
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/prophoto-rgb.shtml
Will report back on my book
TF

Help - Color Management Confusion!

I'm hoping someone can give me some clear guidance as to how to configure my software to integrate color management so that what I see on my monitor is comparable to what I print or post on the web. I've read all I can find on-line and looked through a number of books and magazines, but as my reading increases, so does my confusion - too many menus, options, links and connections. I'll describe what I have in terms of hardware and software in as much detail as possible. My hope is that someone can help me figure out how to coordinate color management across all platforms and outputs.
I run an HP desktop with an ASUS IPD monitor. I have ColorMunki and have reguarly conducted their diagnostic, which gives me an updated monitor profile every two weeks - when a new profile is created, it becomes my default under Windows 7 Control Panel Color Management. I print with an Epson Stylus Photo R1900 with Epson paper and ink. I use the printer and paper profiles supplied by Epson for the R1900 and specific papers.
On the other end, I have Nikon photo equipment. I set the color space on my cameras to ProPhoto and I shoot exclusively in Nikon raw format - .NEF. I shoot a D90 and a D7000 with 12M and 16M files respectively. I download directly from the SD card using Windows Explorer and then import into Lightroom 3.
I have Lightroom 3 and Photoshop CS5 Extended. I use Lightroom to import raw files into the catalog and to do basic editing. From there, I publish to Smugmug as .TIFF files - directly from Lightroom. I also export files from Lightroom to Photoshop CS5 Extended and save them as .PSD and .JPEG files. The files that I export to Smugmug look pretty good - similar to what I see on my screen. My real conundrum is with the Epson printer and Lightroom/Photoshop. What I see on my monitor is very different from what prints. From both platforms. As a rule, the shots are too dark and the colors are often very muted. This is especially true with images of people and skin tones. They often come out looking pale gray or blue.
Right now, my solution is to tweak and print until I get something close enough to print, while the image on my monitor looks horrible. Needless to say, this is not a viable solution for the long term - it is too expensive and time consuming. I've tried to read and then adjust adjust both programs, but I'm confused as to what to set where. I've taken to explorting Lightroom files into Photoshop to use the soft-proof capability. it works better but still not great and not consistent. When I do the Photoshop soft-proof, I see signficant portions of most images as "out of gamut>" I also notice that these areas are often the ones with odd colors.
My problem, (well, one of them) is the multitude of menus that have color management inputs - how do I make sure they are all working together and reinforcing each other instead of working at cross purposes? In Lightroom, I have Page Setup and Print Preferences, as well as Color Management options in the Print Module right hand panel. In Photoshop, I have Print and Page setups, as well as Color Management menus. There are also the Proof menus to consider.
In Photoshop, softproofing, I think I ned to select teh printer profile so that Photoshop is showing me how the printer will interpret the color space. I also think I need to be consistent in how I define the workspace - from Nikon to Lightroom to Photoshop to Epson. If I use ProPhoto with my camera do I need to use that in every circumstance? Should I switch to Adobe RGB? I have printer setting color space turned off in both LR and PS.
Can someone walk me through any or all of this? Right now, all of these moving parts is making me dizzy. It's said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. This proves the point. Three months ago, I had color management problems but had no idea what such a thing was. Now, I know a lot more about it, but my results are no better - worse in some respects. Anyone who can help will earn major Karma points and hae my undying gratitude for several months. Sorry - that's all the compensation I can offer!
Thanks in advance for any help.

Lundberg02 wrote:
is that the hand of God in the picture?
That was a nearly mature tornado forming in Nebraska, and it dissipated at the last moment because at that time the sun went down and the temperature dropped rapidly. I was glad, because I was camping in a travel trailer at the time, and everyone knows trailers attract tornados.
Lundberg02 wrote:
Please explain why and under what circumstances anyone would want to use a device independent profile as a monitor profile, which should be a device dependent profile.
Here's one example, to answer your specific question:
You have a monitor that provides sRGB performance (e.g., via a specific sRGB setting). You judge (and/or ensure via your own calibration) that it provides satisfactory sRGB color accuracy for your needs, so you set the monitor profile to sRGB, which is accurate in this case.
What does this do for you?
Images displayed in Internet Explorer, which assumes your monitor is sRGB regardless of your profile, are now properly color-managed because you have made IE's assumption valid. By the way, Microsoft does not appear to be going to change this behavior any time soon.
Untagged images, considering a majority of untagged images assume sRGB encoding, are displayed properly by apps that just pass them through to the display. Some browsers do this.
sRGB images (the majority) are displayed properly by non-color-managed apps. If you choose to set your preferred working space to sRGB, then your own processed images will display properly using your non-color-managed apps. Such apps include various viewers, the thumbnails in Windows Explorer, etc.
The sRGB IEC61966-2.1 profile is a clean, well-formed color profile and works well in virtually every color-managed application. It's the Windows default, so you can imagine most apps are very well tested with it.
Screen grabs are already in the sRGB color space, so if your working space is sRGB then you gain simplicity and don't have gotchas when mixing screen grabs back into your workflow.
Since the color-gamut is not wide, the distance between adjacent colors in a 24 bit color environment is smaller - the display of gradients looks smoother, and you might not crave 30 bit color quite so much.
There are other subtle advantages as well, simply because so much of software development throughout history has assumed the representation of color images on computers is sRGB. It's akin to "going with the flow".
In short, setting up a soup-to-nuts sRGB system means more images match more often across more applications with a system set up this way. If I'm not mistaken, that's about what the original poster is asking about, which is why RikRamsay's response is not unreasonable.
And there are, of course, some specific disadvantages to doing this.
For one thing, one does not have the direct ability to work with a wider gamut of colors. There are those who wish to work in wider gamut color spaces, have wide gamut monitors, and wide gamut printers. Brighter, better managed colors may well help such a person set his/her work off from the crowd. This is starting to become more and more important in this day and age of better and better wide gamut hardware.
It's not straightforward to set up a system so that its sRGB response is accurate, though it is doable. Can you trust the factory sRGB calibration of a monitor that advertises sRGB response characteristics?
-Noel

Disappearing color profile when saved for the Web

Hello.
I have a problem with the “Save for the Web” results using Photoshop CS6 running on Win 7 x64.
My photos are already in 8 bits and in sRGB and when I save for the Web I check the option “embed color profile”, uncheck “convert to sRGB”, metadata to “copyright and contact info”.
When I open the resulting photos in Photoshop, everything is fine as it recognizes the embedded color profile. Same thing when I open these files in Firefox, Safari or Chrome: the colors are correct.
Now, when I right-click on a file in the Win Explorer and look its properties, the line about the color profile is blank, as if there wasn't any. This doesn't bother me but the problem appears on my Website created with Joomla and using for the display a module, Responsive Image Gallery, which creates resized copies of the photos. At this point the copies have completely lost their color profile. I entered in contact with the module's support and they assured me that it preserves the embedded profile, so I come here to gather some information about how this “Save for the Web” embeds the color profile because may be I just didn't understand how it does and if it's different from the “Save as” way.
The fact I can't see the profile through the Win Explorer makes me think Joomla's module doesn't either.

Incredible how much gballard's site is famous! Lol. I use it for a while now and checked again right now with the three Web browsers and everything is all right.
As indicated in my first post, when saving for the Web I checked the “embed color profile” option. I already resized the file and converted it in sRGB first in Photoshop.
Yes it's pretty confusing to see some software not able to see the color profile when the file is saved with that option.
To illustrate, here are three screenshots from Windows' file browser => right-ckick on the file => properties => details:
Opening that “saved for the Web” file in PS, it's ok, the CP is recognized.
Opening it directly (from the file browser => “open with”) in Web browsers: ok in Firefox, Safari and Chrome (CP recognized in all).
Copying that file in my working site on localhost (no modification), integer it in Joomla's module gallery (which is CP aware) and then opening my site on localhost with Web browsers: ok in Firefox (because it considers a non-tagged file by default as beeing sRGB), NOT OK in Safari neither in Chrome.
Now, if I do the same with the “Save as” version of the file with embedded sRGB CP:
PS: ok
Opened directly in Web browsers: ok in the three cases
Opened in Web browsers through my Joomla site on localhost: OK IN ALL THREE BROWSERS
Good point gator_soup: I'll post a bug report. I'm new here on the forum and thought Adobe's staff would post here.

IWeb 08 screws my photos color profile

Anyone has this problem with the new iWeb 08?
I installed the new version, ran it without any problems, did some rearranging of my site, created a new page etc.. And then published the whole site all over again.
But now, all my images are tagged with the sRGB profile instead of the profile that was in the images.. now all my images have become very saturated and dark. The thumbnails are fine, but when you click in to see the photos in slideshow or not, the images are loaded and it looks horrible.
I've went into my iDisk to check the images and found that all my photos are tagged with the sRGB profile instead of my normal AdobeRGB profile or Nikon sRGB profile or no profile...
ARGH!!!!

iWEB 08 is a fully color confused application, whilst iPhoto is only partly color confused.
The following applies when dragging images from iPhoto library, with the "Optimize Images on Import" option on. According to the manual, this option only changes the size, but I would not be surprised if it changes something else also. Then after, exporting from iWEB to files on the hard drive.
Having spent 8 hours analyzing the problem, I am beginning to understand what is happening but certainly not WHY???
iWEB appear to convert the images 2 times (when importing and when exporting I wonder), both times incorrectly, and to top it off, it exports images without a color profile BUT with the EXIF data of the original, which at this point is incorrect. HOWEVER, it appears that thumbnails are only converted incorrectly once, adding to the confusion.
Before going into some remedies let me answer the question: What color space etc. is "correct" for the WEB?
There are three rules to publishing photos on the WEB (files for download is a different story):
a) Image, including thumbnails should be in sRGB color space (Otherwise it will NOT display correctly on MicroSoft systems, where browsers happily ignores color profiles and sRGB is ASSUMED for all images)
b) There should be an sRGB color profile in the image file, including thumbnails (Otherwise it will NOT display correctly on MacOS, where browsers assume AppleRGB, but will happily adjust to any color profile)
c) Discard unnecessary information in the file to reduce size, such as EXIF information, thumbnails etc (optional rule)
Having said that, you may ask yourself, who do that? Well to tell the truth, not many. A quick check on Apples website reveals that there is a mix of color "strategies". For instance, the pictures demonstrating the cool features of iLife08, appear to be in sRGB but without color profile. Thus, they will be displayed correctly on a MicroSoft system but not on a Mac.
Well, back to iWEB - To try to fix the color problem, do one or both of the following:
1) Keep calling Apple Cupertino until they fix the problem (really, I am not joking, I am tired)
2) Convert images after they have been exported. This seems to work also, almost. However, converting a pictures color space is not exactly reversible, thus result is not perfect. Use for instance Photoshop CS1 or later (make sure color settings is such that there are no conversions when you open files and use the colorimetric conversion option in advanced settings) and:
a) Open picture
b) Assign AppleRGB profile
c) Convert to sRGB
d) Assign the original profile (usually sRGB or AdobeRGB or the cameras RGB)
e) Convert to sRGB
f) Save (with option: include color profile)
File is now about 2 times the original
g) Open graphics converter
h) Choose convert...
i) Choose file(s), hold Cmd-key and choose remove resources (which does not remove the color profile)
File is now ok for publishing on the WEB
TIP, if it seems like a daunting task to manually convert all of the exported images (and do not forget the thumbnails), make an Action-script in Photoshop, then use the Batch feature with sub-folders etc .... . Also the graphics converter operation can be applied to include subfolders. I did this, and it works ok, but be sure to only convert YOUR images, not the other files in the structure. I also applied the same conversion to the thumbnails to simpify things and it turned out not to bad. (Can somebody make an AppleScript maybe?)
And finally, how about iPhoto? Well, iPhoto will always export images in the color space and profile it happens to be imported with, unless you edit the image in some external editor. If you are WEB publishing "lucky", the image will come out in sRGB color space and with an sRGB color profile. And yes, I have also tried various iPhoto-WEB export plug-ins, and they also all do it wrong.
If you read all of this, you are a patient person. Thanks for the attention.
Tomas Jonsson, Genicore Embedded Systems AB

Total ink weight for fabrics or suggested color profile.

My client's approved their project and I now have some tradeshow pop-up panels to "convert to CMYK" that will be printed on [some stretchy unknown] fabric. I was wondering if anyone knows the total ink weight for the [stretchy] textiles used for tradeshows or if there is a suggested color profile to use during conversion (or if the real printers actually want this... I had seen that some textile printers actually prefer LAB). In the past I took a guess and used Web Offset Coated and it came out "okay" on Tyvek where something was printed locally, but these are a "stretchy fabric," so I'm guessing something like Web Offset Uncoated? I know the inkjet printers are capable of outputting a lot of ink and do not want the fabric to run or visually bleed though, also I wasn't sure if the tradeshow fabrics are printed with the typical oversized inkjet printers at all.
The "print vendor" (middleman) told me emphatically CMYK conversion was a must, but seemed confused by the question of suggested color profile for converting and could not provide an answer. Unfortunately they're in a deal with my client and the producer of the booth so I'm stuck with them. Also they have not provide the contact info for the producer of the booth. I'd rather not use uncoated because I know there will be a significant loss of vibrance in the printing. So I come to the plethora of knowledge here at Adobe.

Okay so I received more feedback from my client. When they were pitched it sounds like the vendor is going to print with Dye Sub. I'm thinking the middleman might not know what he's talking about (since they couldn't tell me which CMYK) so to be safe I'm going to provide the files in RGB (Adobe 1998) AND CMYK (U.S. Web Offset Coated SWOP). That way they can pick and choose. I got U.S. Web Offset Coated as a suggestion off a search for CMYK conversion and Dye Sub on large format printers. Hope this helps someone.
Spelling was edited by: Chris Patterson

Quicktime Color Profile wrong

I'm trying my best to understand what is happening with the gamma shifts in Quicktime, and any help is appreciated.
So far I've found: Exporting Quicktime content automatically assigns it the "HD" Color profile and does not use the gamma tag. The "HD" profile seems to be HD 709-A and appears to have a gamma of 1.96. Please allow us to tag the files with the colorspaces/gamma that were used to create the content. I'm working in a color space calibrated to 2.2. Macs these days also seem to come set to 2.2. Unfortunately this seems to cause a brightening after exporting content.
Furthermore, there seems to be inconsistencies between how QT and FCPX handle the "gama" flag. QT seems to follow it which is great when editing with a third party utility, where FCPX ignores it which is all the more frustrating.
I think it's wonderful that we are getting closer to fully color managed workflows for video, but it's incredibly confusing to be forced into assigning a color profile that has nothing to do with how it was created. Please help. If at the very least FCPX would honour the "gama" flag, that would be amazing.

To Apple Discussions!
I'm sort of confused by what you mean by:
"I get wrong color in Quicktime"
Are your movies & videos coming out in the wrong colors?
Which version of QT are you using?
See if repairing permission using your Tiger DVD helps.

Macbook Color Profile Question

I just bought a Macbook from my cousin yesterday. It's in great shape and not very old, which is why I bought it. It's amazing how addictive it is, I've been PC person forever.
I immediately brought it home and installed all my programs, set a desktop photo, and opened photoshop. The coloring on my photos is off. I've tried using Supercal, and calibrating using the tool in the profiles, but I can't figure this out for anything. Being new to MAC, I'm just confused---
I use Firefox for my browser. The colors are perfect in it. When I change my profile and get it to somewhat make my photos look right (or like they did in my PC. All the photos seem to have like an orangey-yellowish look to them, not majorly, but editing photos isn't going to work with it like that.), then I open Firefox and my coloring is completely off on websites.
Does anyone have any suggestions? I would greatly appreciate it.
Thanks in advance!

in short, photos can contain their own ICC (color profile). And this effects how color look on a per photo basis. instead of modifying your display color profile you need to a just or change just color profile of the photo(s) to have them render properly.
One way to tell what color profile need to be altered is to get info on that photo. you can do this in the finder, preview, photoshop. you can also use these applications to change witch ICC is used on a photo.
these apps use ICC color profiles : safari, quick time, preview, finder, quick look, photoshop
firefox dose not use the ICC color profiles attached to photos, but you can tell it to in firefox preferences. when ICC color profiles is off in firefox it's going to use the default color calibration in system preferences display
this website dose a great, but confusing job of comparing different ICC profiles. http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
if you want to become an expert in color management you may want to check out: http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3712 . it also talks about how you can use preview to change what ICC is used with a photo.
Message was edited by: Sherman Campbell

Color profile problem after installing CS4

OK.
First, let me post these side-by-side comparisons:
As you can see in Image 1 (the "before," left-side photo in each comparison), the colors and overall appearance are distorted. I've read things about gamma but it's all confusing to me. This is surely a color profile problem, right? The transition among pixels that involve colors of yellow and gray is rocky, grainy, and the flat out color is just wrong. Now this color problem affects pictures when opened in both Photoshop 7.0 and the standard Windows Photo Viewer. Meaning, whenever I open pictures in both PS 7.0 and Windows Photo Viewer (my default viewer), this color problem totally messes up certain photos and really damages my ability to edit. I'm an avid photo editor and it's imperative I have proper color display so that I can accurately edit. Keep in mind that certain pictures do not take on this error. When a photo is generally brighter, the distortion is basically invisible. It's photos that are dark or have dark portions in them that display the distortion.
*Note: I took these before-and-after pictures with my camera, because screencapping would not work, since you all don't have the same color profile issue on your computer. That's the only way I can show you!
HOWEVER, when I open photos in another standard Windows application, "Microsoft Office Picture Manager," the color problem is magically erradicated altogether. It shows photos as I've been seeing them all along, until I installed CS4 about two weeks ago. Before installing CS4, everything was fine and I had been using Photoshop 7 for years and have never had a problem. I'm guessing CS4 messed something up. It had to have. Just FYI, I uninstalled CS4, hoping it would reverse the problem. But still, the color issue persists in PS 7 and in my regular Windows Photo Viewer.
Since images display their true form in Windows Office Picture Manager, I don't think I need to calibrate my screen. Or do I? I've read things about it, and to some people, it's not necessary. Right? Okay. I really hope someone can give some advice! Thank you!
P.S. Here's the original photo. On my screen, it looks distorted when opened in photoshop or opened w/the viewer. However, here on Firefox, it's fine.

You should try to familiarize yourself with the concepts of color management.
It's kind of too in-depth a subject to walk you through from a cold start here... There are a lot of good resources out there to help you get started. For example, in just a few seconds Google turned up this:
http://www.adobepress.com/articles/article.asp?p=1315593
The one thing to remember is this: There is NO quick solution, easy set of defaults, or direct answer to making your setup do what you want without your having to understand color management.
People may tell you to calibrate your monitors, or use a particular color profile as a default, or whatever, and they may have good, solid reasons for telling you those things, but if you don't attempt to get your mind around color management it will always seem as though something isn't working right, or is simply magic, which will be frustrating to you.
Here are some basic questions to ponder:
What image color profile is your image carrying?
Is your monitor a wide-gamut display and do you have a color profile set up for it? What kind of monitor is it?
What version of Windows are you running?
Do you know the difference between a color-managed app and one that is not color-managed?
Which of the apps you're using/showing above are color-managed?
What are your settings in Edit - Color Settings?
Take some time and do some research, get your head around the concepts, and it will all make more sense I promise you.
-Noel

CMYK color profiles for China

I am using CS2 Indesign and Photoshop 7 on a PC. I have to prepare color
photos for a printer located in China. They want all images to be CMYK
.tiff.
I now have an assortment of about 100 images from various sources around the
world, there are .tif, .jpg. .bmp, and .psd. All of them appear to be RGB.
There are images with: 1) no color profile, 2) sRGB IE60966-2.1, and Adobe
RGB 1998.
I have been converting these to .tif (and using one dpi/pixel resolution for
all images).
Do I just select/save as color mode CMYK? Or are there special
settings/profiles I need to know about for China? My Chinese language
skills are way, way far worse than the printer's English skills. I was
hoping that someone in this group would be familiar with RGB to CMYK for
foreign printers.
Thanks

Sorry for the confusion -- I meant "one" not in the number one -- but I mean
that I am using the same resolution for all images. "One" in this case was
to mean: "singular."
I was wondering if there was a commonly accepted CYMK color profile that is
preferred by book printers in China.

Color profile confusion

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for