Colour colour profiles and JPEG compression mismatch

In preparing images for iBooks I have noticed bizarre behaviours and a number of problems with matching colours.
For example, if a JPEG image all one colour is placed in a gallery widget over a text box, and then the background colour of the textbox is set to the colour of the image by sampling the colour in the image using the colour picker, when downloaded to the iPad the colours will not match (although they appear to in iBooks Author). I presume this must be a bug with the encoding of the JPEG? Or is it a conversion issue between different colour profiles used for the solid colours in iBooks and the sRGB colours that Apple advises using for images?
I have also noticed that if you download a book to an iPad the colour matching between solids and image colours changes radically depending on what monitor you have the computer running iBooks Author plugged into (ie depending on the monitor profile in use). What colour profile does iBooks author use for solids and what for images and why are they different? Is it conversing the solids but not the images, or vice versa, and between which colour spaces? What is the working colour space of iBooks Author? Does it differ depending on the monitor profile? If so, why does converting images to the monitor profile still not result in them matching the solids used in iBooks Author?
In short, does anyone have a clue what is going on with the colour profiles and colour matching in iBooks Author and iBooks on the iPad? They certainly display the most perplexing behaviour I have ever come across.
Giles Hudson

Although you say there is no concept of a colour profile in iOS, the problem is that iBooks Author does recognize profiles, and appears to take them into consideration when downloading images to books on the iPad. For example, an image tagged with an sRGB profile placed in iBooks Author will appear differently from an identical image tagged with an Adobe RGB profile. The problem is, it is not at all clear what conversion is going on, especially when using a monitor with a different colour profile appears to cause radically different behaviour in the conversion. Is it being converted to "Device RGB" that the colour picker apepars to use? What is this Device RGB? The monitor RGB or the iPad RGB?
I understand that iOS supports RGB and CMYK. However, the important question is, which working space does iBooks Author use? sRGB, GenericRGB, Device RGB (whatever that is), Apple RGB, Adobe RGB, the monitor RGB? Without knowing this it is difficult to match solid colours to colours in images (and even arguably impossible due to the JPEG encoding problem I mentioned above).
All this vagueness in colour handling with OSX and iOS makes life very difficult, especially, as you suggest, when things have the potential to change at any minute, potentially wrecking months of painstaking work that has been put into designing books in iBooks Author.

Similar Messages

Document sizes and jpeg compression / quality

In relation to Photoshop, in the status bar at the bottom it displays what it calls “document sizes”. Would someone be able to clarify can this be used to determin the quality of a jpeg file ?
For example if I open up a jpeg with no compression (file size on disk is 4.57mb) it displays Doc:34.5M/34.5M however if I open the same file with compression set at 5 (file size on disk is 748kb) and ‘document size’ doesn’t change. How does the document size relate to jpeg compression etc...?
Thank you

Open a file, say a tiff or psd, zoom in close to the image, about 400% on a recognizable detail. Use the Save As... command, select JPEG, and click Save.
When you get to the dialog box, run the Quality slider to 0 and observe what happens to the pixels. It's like they are clumped together in large blocks.
That's how it saves on disk space when it is written back to the file.
477k/477k is the uncompressed size/size in ram and 31.5k is the saved to file compressed size caused by clumping all those pixels together. Of course you trash the file that way,but that's where compression saves space. Not by reducing the pixel count,but by consolidating them.
My point is is that you adjust that slider by eye and from there decide what optimal quality number is worth the space saved.
With broadband connections and terabyte drives, I would not see any point to less than 12 quality compression these days.

Jpeg compression for tiff image (nt gettin a view of jpeg compressd pages)

Hi All,
I have a problem of jpeg compression inside a tiff file. When I convert no. of pages in a multi-page tiff file I m not getting a view of jpeg compressed pages. I convert black and white as well as gray scale jpeg images inside the tiff file. I used Compression Group4 for black and white image and JPEG compression for gray scale image. Also set the dpi of each page. But most of the viewer doesnt support my jpeg compressed pages. When I set the quality of jpeg images to 0.1f that time I m getting a view of particular images for some image viewer.
My requirement is to show the jpeg compressed image inside the IMAGING PREVIEW 2.5 VERSION. But it doesnt support for my output tiff. As well as cant get properties of that page inside the Fax viewer except Resolution 200x200 dpi.
     If anybody has any idea to compressed jpeg image inside the tiff file, please tell me how I can compress the gray scale image using jpeg compression.
Thank you in advance
Dipak

Hi Maxideon,
Thank u 4 ur immediate reply. But my requirement is, to show d tiff file only in IMAGING PREVIEW 2.5 VERSION. I tried lots but didnt manage to get a view of JPEG compressed page. I think somewhere I m doin wrong. Somewhere I wrote wrong code, cause d properties of jpeg compressd images also not getting in Fax Viewer except DPI. I change the BaselineTIFF Tags of JPEG compressed image, but cant manage output yet. I think d problem create at d time of metadata writing. My problem is tht, tiff created using sum other soft. is suppported by IMAGING PREVIEW 2.5 VERSION, y nt mine?
Here is my code for BaselineTIFFTagSet:
if(isBinaryImage) {
             // resolution unit
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(296), 2));
             // bit per sample
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(258), 1));
             // compression
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(259), 4));
             // rows per strip
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(278), bImageImage.getHeight()));
        } else {
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(296), 2));
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(258), 8));
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(259), 7));
             // thresholding
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(263), 3));
             rootTiffIFD.addTIFFField(new TIFFField(base.getTag(278), bImageImage.getHeight()));
        }     If u have any idea 4 write a metadata of jpeg page wid jpeg compression, can u plz suggest me hw to write a metadata 4 jpeg image? Which Baseline Tags r needed to set d jpeg compression?
Thank you
-dipak

Colour problems saving Ilustrator file to pdf and jpeg (blacks go brown + some quality is lost)

Hi,
I was wandering id anybody could help me with a problem that has plagued me for a few projects now. I can't seem to find a solution.
When I have a file in Illustrator that I want to save as or export as a PDF or JPEG whenever I save it the colours shift and the quality drops.
Most noticiably black boxes goes to a muddy brown when saved to JPEGS, but I have also noticed tones in Photographs change quite a lot when saving as PDF.
I have tried to tweek every type of setting there is. higher resoulution, compression, sampling, down sampling, PDF preset, print quality etc.but nothing seems to sort it out. PDF's arent as much as a problem as the JPEG but the only way I have managed to get a PDF up to a reasonable standard is by wacking everything up so there is no compression or downsampling which makes ginat files I cant email....
Im sure the problem probably lies within the combination of each of these together but I cant seem to find out what that is.
Has anybody else had this problem or know how to fix it? I have been searching blogs for so long?
Thanks
Leo
(Before saving to JPEG)
(After)
Notice the black box with text in has turned a bit brown
Also brown in the seat base has gone more orange and the whole picture has generaly lost quality.

Leo,
The file is CMYK Color Mode. Do you export to a CMYK JPEG or an RGB one?
It is conceivable that the colour conversion of photographs (which are originally RGB) may cause the PDF issue.
Obviously, you will have to choose a Color Mode. If (also) intended for print, the obvious choice is CMYK, but that often affects the appearance or artwork/images originally created in RGB.
Colour management/settings and calibration may also be significant.

PNG colour profiles - and this format for print

I know it's taboo to talk about PNG for printing.
But I can't find and I've searched the forums - there was a post made about embedding colour profiles a while ago.
I know PNG is a RGB only format, but I'm 36.8% sure I read something about embedding either RGB or ... wait for it CMYK profiles into PNG files.
If anyone can shed any light on this - and how about PNG for print - I've been against it for a long time - but it is a lossless format, it can carry 64 bit data.
I know I know - but I thought I'd ask anyway - see what people think.

You can't save a PNG with a profile out of Photoshop, but it looks like you can embed one via the image events scripts that ship with OSX (/Library/Scripts/ColorSync/embed). Unfortunately ID ignores the embedded profile and uses the document's assigned profile instead. PNGs do respond to ID's RGB profile and the RGB profile will have an effect on the CMYK separation when it happens.
Here's ProPhoto and sRGB:
From your ID document you can also assign a profile, which conflicts with the doc's profile, by selecting the png and choosing Image Color Settings.... So, you could assign AdobeRGB as your doc's profile and assign sRGB to all your pngs.

CCP colour profiles and different lenses

Hi,
I just got a Nikon D7000 and I've been playing around with my ColourChecker Passport to set up some standard colour profiles for use in ACR as a general starting point for processing. I've been pondering if it's worth my while to create different profiles for each lens I have, something I've not previously done when profiling my old D60, where I just created a series of profiles (including some dual-illuminants) by using one lens and capturing the target under a variety of different lighting conditions (e.g. tungsten, flash, sunshine, etc).
Anyway, I just tried creating a profile for my 105mm 2.8 lens under tungsten lighting, having previously (yesterday) created one under the same lighting with my 50mm 1.4 lens and I've been comparing them in ACR using the colour dropper. I’ve opened up the images used to create the profiles, applied the profile generated using the ColourChecker software for the corresponding lens, and then set the white balance using the ‘off-white’ colour patch with the eye dropper WB tool. I then used the colour dropper on the same colour patches in each image. I’ve noticed that the RGB colour values aren’t matching quite as well as I’d expected (note that I thought it potentially unrealistic to get a perfect match): blues and greens seem to be roughly the same, so for example with patch #3 (third from left on the top row), one is at 69,72,115 and one at 70,77,115, but reds and oranges seem to be a bit further out of sync, e.g. with patch #15, one is at 99,45,29 and one at 109,51,34; with patch #16 one is at 166,167,29 and one at 175,179,33. This surprises me a little, as I thought the idea of CC was to calibrate the profiles so that colours were essentially the same across different lenses – and different cameras if applicable. I have to say though that, colour values aside, when eyeballing the two images on my monitor (profiled) they do look very similar, which I guess is the main thing!
I wonder if perhaps I’m missing something here? I’m quite prepared to be told that I’ve got this all wrong!
Also, I wonder if others on the forum using CCP have gone to the trouble of creating lens-specific profiles, or if they’ve just created profiles for their camera body using one lens? This is the approach I took with my D60, but having done more reading on CCP I know that some folk do advise to create separate profiles for each lens they use (and I am of course aware that the CCP user manual also states to do this). Do you even create a profile for each and every shoot (when possible)?
I’d be very interested to hear your opinions on this as I’ve not been using CCP for all that long and am always eager to learn more.
M

First of all, a color profile is for correcting color, not luminance, so compare the HSL or Lab coordinates not the RGB values so you can just ignore the L coordinate. From your given RGB numbers, you can already tell that one of the images is brighter than the other so it is just confusing looking at the RGB values and guessing what you would expect the three values to be in the other image. For comparing two images, I would concentrate on the Hue number in HSL coordinates, since Saturation can change with contrast, and Luminance can change with Exposure and Contrast.
Also, as part of your eyedroppering comparison, another thing to do would be adjust the "Exposure" of the darker image until the L number (in HSL or Lab) is the same as the L in the brighter image and then see what the other two numbers are--maybe the other two numbers won't change, and then you can try putting one of the HSL values in the "Old" patch of the color-picker and the other in the "New" patch and see how much different they look. You'll have to do this comparison in Photoshop not ACR so use ProPhotoRGB when you export to keep the colors as close to the same as you can.
The two questions you seem to have, are: does using a lens-specific profile make enough difference to real world situations to bother with, and where are the variations I'm seeing when the profiles are applied to their source images coming from since I would think they would be the same.
For testing whether the profiles computed for the two lenses make a noticeable difference even with your two profiles that don't appear to correct the same, apply the two profiles to the SAME CC image (one of the two you created your profiles with), save an sRGB JPG of each, and see if you can tell the difference, either side-by-side, or even better, when you flip back and forth in some sort of photo viewer--like with Windows Picture Viewer when those are the only two images in the folder. By apply the two profiles to the same image you have mitigated any luminance and white-balance differences in the source image and are merely looking for differences in the effect of the two profiles.
If you can't tell much difference between the same image using each of the two profiles then it's just an academic exercise. I like academic exercises, but am also a perfectionist and lazy so I would do the experimenting until I found out I'd perfected things enough that I can't tell any difference then I can stop. In other words, do I need to profile for various lenses or not, or am I just doing it because I like to control everything as much as possible and it really doesn't make any difference.
Before answering the other question, about where any profile variations might be coming from, understand that the combination of white-balance and color-profile is attempting to convert the colors of an object photographed in the lighting scenario the profile was created for into the colors of the object photographed in a standard lighting scenario. In my mind the works out to be "make the colors of the object look like it was photographed in sunlight". The issue that requires making a profile and not just white-balancing, is that any part of the object that was colored the same as the light color will be neutral when the white-balance is done, and more generally the closer the color of the object is to the color of the light, the more neutral it will become when WB is done. For example, if you have a red ball and a gray ball and photograph them in red light, they will both look gray when white-balanced. A real-world example of this would be flesh-tones in incandescent light, when white-balanced will have even less color and be more neutral or pale or even bluish, than the skin photographed in sunlight, so after white-balancing, the job of an incandescent profile is to boost the reddish colors and diminish the bluish colors so the skin looks like it would in sunlight. This might be an argument for NOT WBing skin in incandescent lighting. In severely-colored lighting, especially nearly monochromatic lighting such as sodium vapor lighting, correcting the colors to be as if in sunlight will be impossible, but to the extent the lighting isn't monochromatic, the colors can be made to look more normal, if not perfectly normal..
To understand whether the differences you're seeing in the profiles are due to the lenses being different color or due to variations in the profiling process, itself, think about where the variations could come from and how you might test for each:
Was the source lighting exactly the same color between the two shots with different lenses (that were taken a day apart)? Test by eyedroppering the WB of same neutral-color patch in each photo and see if there is any difference in the Temp/Tint numbers. You cannot test the source-lighting color unless you have shot with the SAME lens for both days, so if you don't have shots with the same lens, seeing that the WB is not much different between the two shots can give you some comfort that the difference in the profile was not a difference in the source lighting. The source lighting might have changed if there was some daylight mixing in on one day and not the next, or if the A/C was running on one day and not the other and the voltage was slightly different and the redness of the light was different. One other thing that can wreak havoc in repeatability of both color and exposure is if any of the lighting is fluorescent CFL or tubes, because that sort of gas lighting changes intensity as the voltage varies and reverses 60-times per second and this variation is especially noticeable if the shutter is fast. So while your lighting may have been incandescent any changing daylight or flickering fluorescent lighting mixed in might have changed the source-lighting color enough to make a variation in the profile more than the color of the lenses might have.
This first question dealt with the photos taken with each of the two lenses. The remaining questions are about testing with just one lens.
Is the profiling process repeatable? Test by creating two different profiles from the SAME CC photo and be a little sloppy about when marking the corner patches, and see if you get different numbers applying those two profiles. An idea where things might not be repeatable, is that there are slightly variations in the color of the color patches (you should be able to move the eyedropper across the color patch and see if the RGB numbers change) due to slight color noise and depending on where you put the "corner" markers on the CC image, you'll get slightly different results.
Does the exposure make any difference? You can determine this by taking a photograph using the SAME lens in the SAME lighting (a few seconds apart), and just varying the exposure by 1/2 or 2/3 of a stop, and then computing a profile for each exposure and apply those two profiles to one of the exposures and see if the non-L coordinates of HSL or Lab eyedroppered.
If you check all these variations you'll have an idea of how much each affects the profile and then can judge if the magnitude of the differences you're seeing are related to variations with creating the profile, or actually related to differences in the lenses and thus a new profile for each lens might be warranted, assuming you can tell the difference, still. I mean even if you can tell the difference between the profiles created with different lenses, are the differences from the lens significantly more than the differences due to exposure or lighting color or corner-patch placement?
I haven't tried computing a profile for each lens; however, I have created a dual-illuminant profile (2700K and 6500K) and then computed new color-matrix slider values (the ones under where you set the profile) for various lighting conditions using Tindemans' script and despite the slider values being not close to zero, I can hardly tell any difference on the few images I've looked at. Once exception to not having the color-matrix sliders make much difference is when using the dual-illuminant profile with fluorescent lighting, which has a significant Tint value compared to either of the standard illuminants, but in the case of fluorescent lighting, I'd rather compute a whole new profile, than use a slider-corrected dual-illuminant profile.
Besides eyedroppering Lab or HSL coordinates in Photoshop, another way to check for color variations is to create a color-error plot in the Color Check module of Imatest and see how far the squares and circles are off from each other for each color-patch. An example of such a color-error plot is linked below, where it shows how far off the colors of a color-checker are in incandescent lighting after computing a color-profile in incandescent lighting. You'd expect them to be completely correct, but they aren't, and is a lesson in color profiles only being to go part way in making the colors look as if they were photographed in sunlight:
http://www.pbase.com/ssprengel/image/101322979
If you click on the above image, you will return to the thumbnails for color-error the gallery, and in the gallery description you can see links to both Imatest and Tindemans' script if you care to pursue things more in depth. Imatest is not free but does have a free 30-day trial, which should be enough time to get some useful information out of it.

Differences in colours between Photoshop and Bridge

I have a question that have puzzled me for a while. There's some differences between the colours in bridge and in photoshop. When they're previewed in Bridge it has nice warm and sligtly desaturated feel to it. When i open the RAW file in Photoshop it gets much pale and red. Why is that? The same thing happens when i shoot the picture and the first preview shows the warm and desaturated version, but when i see the picture again it's back to the pale and red version. Same thing happens, when i open it in Ligthroom. When i click on a picture, it shows the warm and desaturated version, but quickly return to the other one, after the picture is loaded.
I really like the warm and slightly desaturated version, so is there a way i can keep it, or bring it back? I know it has something to do with the colour conversion, that happens in the camera, but i can't figure out how to use it.
I'm shooting with a Canon EOS 5d mkIII. See a screenshot of the issue.
Please help me...
Lars

There is a non-obvious menu at the top right hand side of Bridge that selects whether Bridge displays the camera generated jpeg within the raw file (your preferred rendering above) or the ACR version (the warmer redder image). I set mine to High Quality so the Bridge version always matches the ACR, even if it takes slightly longer to render.
Canon has its own algorithm for conversion and AFAIK they don't share it with Adobe. My advice is change the Bridge setting so that the two match, and try the other camera profiles under ACR Camera Calibration to see if one is more pleasing than the stock Adobe Standard. Alternatively, you can get into modifying/creating your own camera profiles, but that will take some more study and tools, such as using the DNG Profile Editor.
Richard Southworth

Different colours on mac and online

Hi
I have problems with colours on macbook. The problem is that if I work in lightroom, photoshop and any image processing software on macbook the colours look really nice. However, if I upload the picture online the colours are washed off.
here is a screenshot with an example: http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3556/3552934173aea5f072d1o.jpg
On the left there is a picture that I uploaded online on picasa and on the right there is a picture that I opened on mac. It drives me really crazy. my display colour settings are default LCD. When I export the picture from lightroom I use sRGB and 100% quality.
I tried to change the setting of my disply to sRGB but then everything is blue on my screen.
I tested it with several web browsers and the problem is the same. Also, I put the pics on usb drive and opened them on a linux machine and the colours were washed off as well.
Does anyone know what is the problem and how to solve it?
Monika

Actually, you CAN accurately calibrate a glossy screen with a proper metering system and technique, but that isn't the original poster's problem.
When you visualize an image under Photoshop and your screen is calibrated, your "Proof Setup" settings in Photoshop tell the program how you want the image to be modified for display on your display. Most likely, you have the proofing settings set such that Photoshop is expecting to display on a calibrated screen. Photoshop then, modifies the on-screen appearance of the image to appear as correctly as possible on your CALIBRATED screen. It doesn't put the raw RGB values of the image on screen. So, you adjust the image until it looks right, but that will only be true on another calibrated screen. This works well for professionals, because they calibrate their displays and when you move the image from one machine to another, their copy of Photoshop can use the calibration data in the image and their display to make the image look roughly the same from display to display.
When you are creating images for the web, the browser doesn't color adjust the image to match the image's embedded profile (and your JPEG for the web probably doesn't include the profile anyways). Also, the audience doesn't have the same display calibration as you do. Hence, the web user never sees the same color and luma values you so painstakingly balanced in Photoshop. Further, even on your own calibrated display, you won't see the same colors in your browser as in Photoshop's color tweaked display environment.
Solution: If your goal is merely to see colors in Photoshop during image tweaking the same as a browser on your OWN display, open a sample image in both Photoshop and your web browser. Then, try Photoshop Proof Setup as "Monitor RGB", "Macintosh RGB", then "Windows RGB" and find the setup that yields a rendering in Photoshop that best matches what you see in your browser. Use that setting to do all you image tweaks. That is about the best you'll be able to do.
You can't really compensate for all those uncalibrated displays out there, but at least you'll be authoring images that look reasonably good on most displays and pretty predictable in color on those displays that are calibrated similar characteristics as your own.
I author images with a display at d65 with a gamma of 2.4 to emulate CRT displays, but frequently you'll also see display calibrated to gamma 2.2. For cross platform work, I'd stay away from display gamma 1.8 or you risk creating washed out looking images for the majority of displays (PC's and video monitors)

Lightroom won't recognise all my colour management profiles

I can't get Lightroom to recognise all the colour profiles I have saved in the Library profile file. I have downloaded them from a printing service and Lightroom is only picking up a random 6 out of 13. I am trying to do this in the color management section by clicking on profile then other. The problem is that only 6 profiles are showing in the choose profile dialogue box. I've tried closing Lightroom down and starting it again several times and also deleting the profiles and reinstating them. I have also recently deleted the preference file in the Library in case there are any general problems going on. Thanks in advance for any help.

abihedderwick wrote:
As far as I'm aware, none of the ones I've downloaded are CMYK profiles -
Profile have to be downloaded and installed. And the installation has to be done in a certain folder, or Lr and other programs cannot find the profiles.
But if you can see the profile in Photoshop but not in Lr, then nothing is wrong with your installation, and the only conclusion left is that it's a CMYK profile.
In Windows color profiles have to be installed in this folder: C:\Windows\System32\spool\drivers\color.

Difference in colour between 2012 and 2010 proc

I know that newer 2012 process tries to save detail in the highlights (different tonal curve I guess), and has much better controls in Basic develop module so I was eager to edit my newest shots in LR4.
However, I wasn't so thrilled how it rendered bright pinkish colours.
Two examples below are cropped parts of a photograph, have default values, using Adobe Standard profile, from Canon7D raw file.
Image done in 2012 process, default values.
And this one is 2010:
It doesn't seem a big deal when viewed in the web browser on the white background, but the difference is very obvious when editing those in LR. Notice that 2012 file has a "better" histogram with "safe" highlight zone.
However, it altered the colours as well and histogram shows that too. Pink blouse seem more washed out. I can assure you that process 2010 file is much more closer to the original scene, original colours.
So... can I do anything about this? Can it be corrected in final LR4 version? Sure I can raise the saturation in the pink channel, but that will raise other, well saturated, areas as well and I won't get the same result like in 2010 proc. file.

I've been testing the "2012 Process" using a Macbeth color checker image (raw). My first goal was to determine what settings in LR/2012 would best match CS5/ACR6/2010. I was not trying to preserve the 2010 process, just want to better understand the difference.
First pass just using the defaults in both versions resulted in differences of 3 to 5 points in the RGB values of the 24 patches of the colorchecker. On some patches, one of the RGB values might be the same, but at least one was different by 3 to 5 points. The 2012 version looked lighter overall, so I suspected that the difference was due to tones (as Jeff Schewe has suggested).
So by trial and error I kept reprocessing the LR4/2012 version, decreasing only the Blacks slider. When I got to a setting of Blacks -8, the black colorchecker patch finally matched all 3 RGB values. All the other patches were very close, with a few differences of only 1 point in RGB values, and usually in only 1 value (red or green or blue, but not all three)
However, there was 1 exception. The Blue value in the colorchecker's Yellow patch had a 7 point difference. All the other primary patches were exact matches.
My colorchecker test images were from a Canon 5D2, processed under the Adobe Standard profile, rendered as 16bit TIFs in Adobe98 colorspace, and stacked as Photoshop layers to read the RGB values.
So I suspect what many are perceiving as color differences are real differences, but are caused by the basic difference in tonal rendition between the 2012 and 2010 processes. For the OP, please reprocess your pinks in LR4 with some different black settings and see if you get closer to your original 2010 version. I'd be curious to hear the results.

Multi coloured spinning cursor and mac air keeps freezing?

multi coloured spinning cursor and mac air keeps freezing?

Force Quit .
Press command + option + esc keys together at the same time for 3 seconds. Wait.
When Force Quit window appears, select the application if not already.
Press Force Quit button at the bottom of the window. Wait.
Application will quit.
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT3411
Start up in Safe Mode.
http://support.apple.com/kb/PH11212?viewlocale=en_US

N8: Missing JPEG compression settings and gallery ...

1) Where's the use of a fine 12 MP camera if a harsh JPEG compression algorith destroys almost all photos taken ?
PLEASE introduce a setting for adjusting the compression strength.
I know there are solutions available already - but these only work with flashing the phone.
2) After updating some social network software the button for opening the gallery (right after taking a photo) vanished - and now shows an icon for uploading the photo instead of opening the gallery. ARGH ! - Even deinstalling that update did not bring the gallery button back. I now curse myself (and Nokia) for installing that senseless update.
That gallery button was such a nice workaround for checking the quality of a photo taken:
That instant photo display after shooting does not allow zooming - so it's of no use because you cannot check the quality; without zooming in, you cannot see if a picture taken was out of focus or blurred by hands shaking.
So PLEASE: Restore the gallery button OR lets us zoom a photo taken right after shooting.
It's of no use instantly uploading a picture to social networks if you can't check if the quality is sufficient.

Hape: There are always people who like everything. There are even people who like getting slapped in the face. So this shouldn't be an excuse for every nonsense possible.
The problem: That new button is just useless because you wouldn't upload a picture prior to knowing if it really is of the quality needed: On the N8s small screen, even blurred or out-of-focus pictures look ok. You'll only see the differences after zooming in.
But you CAN'T zoom in using the quick view feature right after taking the photo - you need to open the picture taken using the gallery.
Of course you may open the gallery via the menu - but you need to scroll down for finding the right menu entry. Takes unnecessary time and is a source of error.
A QUICK review should be a QUICK review - you don't want to miss the next photo opportunity just because you waste your time fiddling with the menu entries just because Nokia destroyed a working system by introducing a button which is of no use if you cannot check the photo's quality prior to using it.
And again: Why doesn't deinstalling restore the previous state ? - As said: I deinstalled that senseless update - but that ugly button is still there.
So again:
PLEASE, Nokia: Remove that senseless button OR let us zoom photos in quick view.

I just received my iPhoto book. It is horrible. The colour is faded, and the pages are cut on an angle showing a crooked whit line on the bottom of the page. Who do I contact?

I just received my iphoto book. It is horrible. The photo colours are faded and the pages have been cut on a angle (showing a crooked white line at the bollom of each page. This is not the view on my home computer. Who do I contact to get this fixed?

Contact Apple support
what does your preview show? -
Before ordering your book preview it using this method - http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1040 - and save the resulting PDF for reference - the delivered book will match it.
LN

Calendar colours broken suddenly, and odd new calendar called, "New List"?

Hi,
So, suddenly today iCloud has changed the colours of two or three of my calendars spontaneously after them being the same colour for months, and won't let me change them back - after a sync they just revert to whatever iCloud has decided they must now be.
I've checked in BusyCal (my default) and Calendar, and changes to either of them are just reverted on sync. There doesn't seem to be a way to change colours in iCloud itself.
Also, I now have a new calendar in iCloud all of a sudden called, "New List", with a tick next to it. If I delete it it just comes back on next sync. This doesn't appear in iCloud or in Calendar, only BusyCal.
Help?
EDIT: I'm running 10.8.5. Apple's Discussion board doesn't seem to want to let me change my device details no matter how hard I try.

This is the response I received from BusyCal support yesterday...
Something changed on iCloud recently that affects calendar colors in BusyCal. We are investigating it and will notify you once we have found the cause of the problem or a solution.
Regards,
-John
[email protected]

Different Colours In Main and Submenus

Hi All,
Is it possible to have different text colours for the main menu and the submenus?.
"ul.MenuBarHorizontal a" seems to be styling everything and I would prefer to have different colours if possible
thanks
Neil
www.neilmarksphotography.com

Ben,
thanks for that, I'll give it a try
Neil
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 06:53:38 -0700
From: [email protected]
To: [email protected]
Subject: Different Colours In Main and Submenus
Hi Neil,
There are several ways of applying a style rule to your menu.
One way is to apply a rule to ul.MenuBarHorizontal a. This will affect all as you have already mentioned. Then to add a new rule as follows
ul.MenuBarHorizontal li ul li {
background-color: green;
which will override the first rule for your submenus.
I hope this helps.
Ben
>

Colour colour profiles and JPEG compression mismatch

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for