FF9 not respecting wide gamut color space profile

Let me preface this with that this all works with Safari 5.1.2 (which seems to have a memory leak, thus my reason for trying FF9 at this point). Lightroom and Safari agree. IE8, as always, is skewed to the reds in the image. FF9 is matching that behavior. I have tried going into about:config and setting color_management.enablev4 to True (didn't help). I have tried the mode to 0 and 1 (didn't help). Yes, I shut down FF between attempts.

gloworm666 wrote:
Ran my i1display2 [b]on auto[/b] (so its not perfect) for all of you out there who want an alternative to lenovo's color profile. v2 and v4 included. use the v2 for firefox color management or your colors will still be off. The V2 version is the one that starts with "CONVERTED" in the filename.
http://www.mediafire.com/?3gwur73bnnr7v34
enjoy
Loving my new w520
Looks like this file is down. Can anyone repost please?

Similar Messages

Question: sRGB color space profile icm

I am trying to convert a file to color space sRGB color space profile.icm. The profile is located in my library on my hard drive under recommended profiles but it does not appear in the drop down menu under edit/convert to profile. Any ideas about why? I have performed this task on my MAC at my college but can't seem to do it on my MAC in my studio...

LR converts them to the colorspace specified on the Export panel. There are several choices, including sRGB. You may need to expand various sections to see the option.

What color spaces/profiles are used?

I can’t find any information on the color
spaces/profiles/tags used for the Kuler color conversions.... can
someone please help?
Thanks

The ICC-profiles should be selectable.
They should always show up behind the RGB and CMYK entries.
Also the used CMM should be selectable and documented on
screen.
A colortransformation without knowing about these conditions
is worthlessly.
There should be a information whether the created color fits
the RGB- or CMYK-Profile-Color-space or was cropped (by the
rendering intent).
It would be nice if kuler would be allowed by the user of
that website to use the actuell CS3-Colorsetup (selected on the
users computer).
If a color theme is stored and published, all this should be
documented with that theme.
Thanks

Changing color spaces/profiles

How do I change the color profile of files that were processed using ProPhoto color space to sRGB? Thanks in advance.

Thanks Lundberg02. So if I want to change the color space of some files from ProPhoto to sRGB for web use, I should be converting and not assigning the color space, correct?

Color space/profile name

I have some pictures that don't show a thumbnail in iPhoto. The info dialog for them says the Color Space is "Gray" and the Profile name is "Gr?skala - gamma 2,2". If I double-click on of these the enlarged image seems somewhat faded. The picture looks fine if I just view it directly in Preview, or ColorSync Utility. It seems most pictures have a Color Space of RGB, how to I change the Color Space of these files to RGB?

Justin:
Download the Automator application "Embed sRGB Profile" from Toad's Cellar and unzip it. Then locate the original files for those problem images and drop them on it. Next launch iPhoto with the Command+Option keys depressed and follow the instructions to rebuild the library and select the first three options. This should get those images compatible with iPhoto.
Do you Twango?
TIP: For insurance against the iPhoto database corruption that many users have experienced I recommend making a backup copy of the Library6.iPhoto database file and keep it current. If problems crop up where iPhoto suddenly can't see any photos or thinks there are no photos in the library, replacing the working Library6.iPhoto file with the backup will often get the library back. By keeping it current I mean backup after each import and/or any serious editing or work on books, slideshows, calendars, cards, etc. That insures that if a problem pops up and you do need to replace the database file, you'll retain all those efforts. It doesn't take long to make the backup and it's good insurance.
I've written an Automator workflow application (requires Tiger), iPhoto dB File Backup, that will copy the selected Library6.iPhoto file from your iPhoto Library folder to the Pictures folder, replacing any previous version of it. You can download it at Toad's Cellar. Be sure to read the Read Me pdf file.

Why does Lightroom (and Photoshop) use AdobeRGB and/or ProPhoto RGB as default color spaces, when most monitors are standard gamut (sRGB) and cannot display the benefits of those wider gamuts?

I've asked this in a couple other places online as I try to wrap my head around color management, but the answer continues to elude me. That, or I've had it explained and I just didn't comprehend. So I continue. My confusion is this: everywhere it seems, experts and gurus and teachers and generally good, kind people of knowledge claim the benefits (in most instances, though not all) of working in AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. And yet nobody seems to mention that the majority of people - including presumably many of those championing the wider gamut color spaces - are working on standard gamut displays. And to my mind, this is a huge oversight. What it means is, at best, those working this way are seeing nothing different than photos edited/output in sRGB, because [fortunately] the photos they took didn't include colors that exceeded sRGB's real estate. But at worst, they're editing blind, and probably messing up their work. That landscape they shot with all those lush greens that sRGB can't handle? Well, if they're working in AdobeRGB on a standard gamut display, they can't see those greens either. So, as I understand it, the color managed software is going to algorithmically reign in that wild green and bring it down to sRGB's turf (and this I believe is where relative and perceptual rendering intents come into play), and give them the best approximation, within the display's gamut capabilities. But now this person is editing thinking they're in AdobeRGB, thinking that green is AdobeRGB's green, but it's not. So any changes they make to this image, they're making to an image that's displaying to their eyes as sRGB, even if the color space is, technically, AdobeRGB. So they save, output this image as an AdobeRGB file, unaware that [they] altered it seeing inaccurate color. The person who opens this file on a wide gamut monitor, in the appropriate (wide gamut) color space, is now going to see this image "accurately" for the first time. Only it was edited by someone who hadn't seen it accurately. So who know what it looks like. And if the person who edited it is there, they'd be like, "wait, that's not what I sent you!"
Am I wrong? I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. I shoot everything RAW, and I someday would love to see these photos opened up in a nice, big color space. And since they're RAW, I will, and probably not too far in the future. But right now I export everything to sRGB, because - internet standards aside - I don't know anybody who I'd share my photos with, who has a wide gamut monitor. I mean, as far as I know, most standard gamut monitors can't even display 100% sRGB! I just bought a really nice QHD display marketed toward design and photography professionals, and I don't think it's 100. I thought of getting the wide gamut version, but was advised to stay away because so much of my day-to-day usage would be with things that didn't utilize those gamuts, and generally speaking, my colors would be off. So I went with the standard gamut, like 99% of everybody else.
So what should I do? As it is, I have my Photoshop color space set to sRGB. I just read that Lightroom as its default uses ProPhoto in the Develop module, and AdobeRGB in the Library (for previews and such).
Thanks for any help!
Michael

Okay. Going bigger is better, do so when you can (in 16-bit). Darn, those TIFs are big though. So, ideally, one really doesn't want to take the picture to Photoshop until one has to, right? Because as long as it's in LR, it's going to be a comparatively small file (a dozen or two MBs vs say 150 as a TIF). And doesn't LR's develop module use the same 'engine' or something, as ACR plug-in? So if your adjustments are basic, able to be done in either LR Develop, or PS ACR, all things being equal, choose to stay in LR?
ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
PS RGB Workspace: ProPhotoRGB and I convert any 8-bit documents to 16-bit before doing any adjustments.
Why does one convert 8-bit pics to 16-bit? Not sure if this is an apt comparison, but it seems to me that that's kind of like upscaling, in video. Which I've always taken to mean adding redundant information to a file so that it 'fits' the larger canvas, but to no material improvement. In the case of video, I think I'd rather watch a 1080p movie on an HD (1080) screen (here I go again with my pixel-to-pixel prejudice), than watch a 1080p movie on a 4K TV, upscaled. But I'm ready to be wrong here, too. Maybe there would be no discernible difference? Maybe even though the source material were 1080p, I could still sit closer to the 4K TV, because of the smaller and more densely packed array of pixels. Or maybe I only get that benefit when it's a 4K picture on a 4K screen? Anyway, this is probably a different can of worms. I'm assuming that in the case of photo editing, converting from 8 to 16-bit allows one more room to work before bad things start to happen?
I'm recent to Lightroom and still in the process of organizing from Aperture. Being forced to "this is your life" through all the years (I don't recommend!), I realize probably all of my pictures older than 7 years ago are jpeg, and probably low-fi at that. I'm wondering how I should handle them, if and when I do. I'm noting your settings, ssprengel.
ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
I save my PS intermediate or final master copy of my work as a 16-bit TIF still in the ProPhotoRGB, and only when I'm ready to share the image do I convert to sRGB then 8-bits, in that order, then do File / Save As: Format=JPG.
Part of the same question, I guess - why convert back to 8-bits? Is it for the recipient? Do some machines not read 16-bit? Something else?
For those of you working in these larger color spaces and not working with a wide gamut display, I'd love to know if there are any reasons you choose not to. Because I guess my biggest concern in all of this has been tied to what we're potentially losing by not seeing the breadth of the color space we work in represented while making value adjustments to our images. Based on what several have said here, it seems that the instances when our displays are unable to represent something as intended are infrequent, and when they do arise, they're usually not extreme.
Simon G E Garrett Apr 29, 2015 4:57 AM
With 8 bits, there are 256 possible values. If you use those 8 bits to cover a wider range of colours, then the difference between two adjacent values - between 100 and 101, say - is a larger difference in colour. With ProPhoto RGB in 8-bits there is a chance that this is visible, so a smooth colour wedge might look like a staircase. Hence ProPhoto RGB files might need to be kept as 16-bit TIFs, which of course are much, much bigger than 8-bit jpegs.
Over the course of my 'studies' I came across a side-by-side comparison of either two color spaces and how they handled value gradations, or 8-bit vs 16-bit in the same color space. One was a very smooth gradient, and the other was more like a series of columns, or as you say, a staircase. Maybe it was comparing sRGB with AdobeRGB, both as 8-bit. And how they handled the same "section" of value change. They're both working with 256 choices, right? So there might be some instances where, in 8-bit, the (numerically) same segment of values is smoother in sRGB than in AdobeRGB, no? Because of the example Simon illustrated above?
Oh, also -- in my Lumix LX100 the options for color space are sRGB or AdobeRGB. Am I correct to say that when I'm shooting RAW, these are irrelevant or ignored? I know there are instances (certain camera effects) where the camera forces the shot as a jpeg, and usually in that instance I believe it will be forced sRGB.
Thanks again. I think it's time to change some settings..

Photoshop and Bridge Color Space Mismatches

I've recently scanned a number of photos (.TIFF) using the Wide Gamut Color Space (Nikon AdobeWide 4.0.0.3000).
Bridge shows:
Color Mode = RGB
Color Profile = Nikon AdobeWide 4.0.0.3000
However when I open them using the embedded profile, Photoshop CS5 shows on the file Info/Camera Data Tab
Color Space = sRGB, or
Color Space = Uncalibrated.
I opened the files in IDImager to see what it showed. It had under Technical Data
Color Space = AdobeRGB
Color Profile = Nikon AdobeWide 4.0.0.3000
So, Bridge and IDImager seem fine; Photoshop seems to have some difficulty.
The monitor is calibrated.
Why would Photoshop behave in this way? Is there anything I should be concerned about in what PS may be doing.
Dale

Probably something to do with your Edit->Color Settings. Is the second RGB dropdown set to Convert to Working RGB?

W510/W520 FHD, color profile supplied by Lenovo is wrong (sRGB clone, not wide gamut)

Hi!
I think I discovered a problem with the monitor profile for Thinkpad 95% gamut FHD LCDs:
The "TPLCD95.icm" monitor profile for FHD 95% gamut LCDs seems to be just a copy of the default sRGB profile. Thus it is likely not a calibrated representation of these screens!
This defect has been there since version 4.33 and is still in the latest version 4.35 of the "Monitor file for Windows 7 (32-bit,64-bit), Vista (32-bit,64-bit), XP (32-bit,64-bit) and 2000 - ThinkPad" package, http://www-307.ibm.com/pc/support/site.wss/document.do?lndocid=MIGR-62923
In contrast, the "TPLCD60.ICM" and "TPLCD100.ICM" files of other screen types appear to be proper. Lenovo should provide a similarly produced "TPLCD95.ICM" file and update the drivers! (For the poor people without built-in color sensor.)
Some proof for the unconvinced why the "TPLCD95.icm" profile is not proper (just an sRGB clone):
* The RGB colorants are exactly the same in the "TPLCD95.icm" and "sRGB Color Space Profile.icm" files, e.g. gXYZ = 0.385,0.717,0.097. (In "TPLCD100.ICM" the gXYZ colorant is 0.226,0.680,0.094 and in "AdobeRGB1998.icc" it is 0.205,0.626,0.061.)
* The tone repro curves of "TPLCD95.icm" and "sRGB" are both 1024 elements and identical for rTRC, gTRC and bTRC. (In the "TPLCD100.ICM" file it consists of only 9 points, presumably measured, and there are different curves for R, G and B.)
* The suffix of "TPLCD95.icm" file is in lowercase letters, indicating that it was made in a different workflow than the "TPLCD100.ICM" and "TPLCD60.ICM files". Also the file sizes are very different.
* By experiment: Set the monitor profile to "TPLCD95.icm" and open an image in Windows Photo Viewer (for example the Chrysanthemum.jpg image from the Sample Pictures folder in Win7). Then repeat with sRGB as monitor profile, you'll get the same color. Repeat with "TPLCD100.ICM" to get a reduced gamut, as expected from a wide gamut profile. That's how "TPLCD95.icm" should be too, except of course calibrated for the 95% gamut LCD not 100% RGBLED.
In the meanwhile, could anyone with a sensor calibrated W510/W520 95% gamut FHD screen care to share their ICM/ICC file?
Yours,
Mikael Sterner

As a workaround, I can suggest the excellent QuickMonitorProfile tool by Eberhard Werle: http://quickgamma.de/QuickMonitorProfile/indexen.html
It can create a profile just based on the rgb chromaticities, white point and gamma in the EDID information from the monitor. On my W520 FHD it reads out rxy=0.676/0.314, gxy=0.215/0.665, bxy=0.141/0.069, wp=D65, gamma=2.2. This matches what is in the LCD panel datasheet: http://www.notebook-lcd.ru/pdf/B156HW01_V_4.pdf
The created synthetic profile is better than nothing, and is the minimum what Lenovo should have included.

Color Space Issue with Wide-Gamut monitor

Since getting my new (and carefully calibrated) LaCie 324 monitor, I have noticed that RAW (and maybe other) images exported from Lightroom as
sRGB jpegs look washed out and slightly green when viewed outside of Lightroom (IE8, Firefox, ACDSee, windows 7 viewer). It seems not to matter whether the external application horors embedded color space profiles or not, since the unmanaged ones assume sRGB.
When I bring one of these jpegs into PhotoShop it still looks bad, and not what I see in Lightroom. However, if I Assign the Adobe RGB profile to the image, it immediately looks like the Lightroom version. And if I then Convert that image to sRGB and save it, it looks fine everywhere, even on an uncalibrated standard Dell TN LCD display.
Any ideas what I might be seeing here. A friend with the same monitor has the same problem, which is what is leading me to suspect the monitor.
The first image here is converted from Lightroom with sRGB color space. The second was first assigned the Adobe RGB color profile and then converted and saved out again as a jpeg.
Converted Only

I downloaded and ran the program. My version number appears to be 2.1 if I read the numbers right.
I am still at a loss as to why my sRGB jpegs only look right if I assign the wrong profile to them.
Here are the settings in Windows 7 for color management. The highlighted profile is the one just created for my monitor. Display 2 is my main display. Note the "viewing conditions" setting on the advanced tab. Do you think the rendering intent might be at fault here? In Lightroom, should I use Perceptual over Relative or vice versa?

MPB 17" and what Adobe RGB color space coverage I might expect from it

Hello,
I am photographer and currently PC user. However, I plan to dive to the Mac’s world.
Before I become a Mac user, I have few questions.
Now I think about MacBook Pro 17”, i7 2.66MHz, 8GB RAM, 500 GB 7200rpm HDD and antiglare screen.
I plan to use additional monitor for photo editing.
I did search on google about *NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M* and *Adobe RGB color space* it covers, however, it gave me no results related to Mac. The only information about this card and Adobe colors I found is that Sony Vaio use this graphic card and in some forums, one say it covers 98% and in other 100% of Adobe color space which made me wonder what type of screen Vaio have.
- is MacBook Pro 17” good for photo editing?
- what % of AdobeRGB color space I might expect from it on my external screen or what % of sRGB colors space it delivers?
- Is it possible to calibrate Mac’s native screen and external one, use both at the time and have different profiles on each?
- Tell me anything that would stop me thinking about MBP for photo editing?
Thank you for your time reading this and hope to find the answers here.

You should consider posting your questions in the Pro Application section for Aperture. You will bump into more photographers there than you will here. But I will make an attempt at answers:
whats about Adobe color space?
No, the MBP screen will not encompass the Adobe Color Space. In fact, few desktop monitors are capable of this.
does the native MBP screen display full color range the video card is able to produce...
There really is no limit to the color extremes, which define a color space, as established by a graphics card. So your question is not a well formed question. An old ATI Rage card with 8-bit output would reveal the same color gamut as would the NVIDIA GeForce GT 330M connected to the same display. The gamut is determined by the attached display, not the graphics card.
...or connecting external monitor to it’s mini display port would bring much wider color range to my eyes?
Yes, certainly the potential for that exists. Notebook screens are usually a compromise and can't be expected to compete with a high-end desktop display in many categories, including color gamut. But whether it would bring a "much wider color range to" your eyes is hard to say. It depends on what type of external display is in use.

Quick develop and color space ...

Ok, I know that library module previews are in Adobe RGB.
So, we view files which are in Adobe RGB.
But what about editing?
What color space we use when adjusting in quick develop in library module?

Armut12 wrote:
Thank you for such a clear summary.
Do you know why does Adobe not use Melissa RGB in library mode previews?
As far as I can see, assigning an Adobe RGB profile to a JPG file and assigning a ProPhoto RGB profile to a JPG file does not create any difference in file sizes.
Is there a disadvantage of using Melissa RGB in library views?
Melissa RGB isn't really a supported RGB working space. That is, it's not something you'll find anywhere outside of LR unlike say sRGB, Adobe RGB (1998), ProPhoto etc. It isn't installed or used by any other Adobe app. It's kind of a strange beast too: ProPhoto RGB with the sRGB gamma TRC. We'd have to ping the original LR architect (Mark Hamburg) to find out why he decided to use this odd space solely for RGB values and Histogram but I suspect the main reason is that viewing a linear encoded Histogram would confuse most users (it would look 'odd'). I can't say why he didn't just use the ProPhoto 1.8 TRC instead but that's water under the bridge. This space is not ProPhoto RGB due to the gamma encoding and it isn't used for processing! Only the RGB values and Histogram.
The actual color space used for processing has no name. It IS ProPhoto RGB primaries with a 1.0 TRC.
I suspect that using Melissa RGB or a similar huge gamut is unnecessary in any preview mode because:
1. Being so big, you'd want high bit (16-bit) data to reduce banding and that's overkill.
2. There isn't and never will be a display capable of previewing ProPhoto gamut.
3. There are a few displays that get close to Adobe RGB gamut, we may see that grow in the future. So might as well use that large gamut color space for previews. IOW, ProPhoto is way, way too big, sRGB is too small considering we have wide gamut displays.
IF you have Photoshop, you can build Melissa RGB and save that out as a profile. Only useful if you want to play around but has no practical use. In Photoshop's color settings, select ProPhoto RGB as your working space. In the same menu, now select "Custom RGB". The dialog shows you the "DNA" of ProPhoto RGB (white point, chromaticity values, gamma). Change the gamma to 2.2, save as an ICC profile. You now have Melissa RGB. You don't get the true sRGB TRC but a simplified one, but close enough.

Out-of-gamut colors

I am working on something that will only be seen on a computer screen, and I want to use out-of-gamut colors, but I can't find a color profile that will allow it.
Is there any setting I can use that will allow me to use out-of-gamut colors?
Thanks!!

If by out of gamut you mean the colors that show an exclamation sign in the Color panel and Color picker when working in RGB documents, these are colors in the color space of the document that are not contained in the CMYK color space selected as a Working Space in your Color settings. Or in other words this is how these colors will become when you change the RGB document to CMYK.
For example if you have an RGB document using the sRGB color space and the working CMYK color space is U.S. Web Coated SWOP v2 you will have one set of out of gamut colors, but if you change your working CMYK color space in the Color Settings to US Newsprint which is with much smaller gamut then a lot more RGB colors will show the out of gamut warning sign.
Likewise if you keep your working CMYK color space the same say, U.S. Web Coated SWOP v2 but assign a different RGB color space to your document let's say Adobe RGB or ProphotoRGB which have much larger gamuts than the sRGB color space then also a lot more colors will show out of gamut.
If by out of gamut you mean in general the colors in a any color space regardless its color mode RGB or CMYK that are not contained in another color space, you have to specify which two color spaces you are talking about. Examples of color spaces are those that you can see in the RGB menu in the Working Spaces section of the Color Settings. The color spaces that can be described in a color profiles can be RGB or CMYK.
edit:
tamarasussman wrote:
I am working on something that will only be seen on a computer screen, and I want to use out-of-gamut colors
Each monitor, not only brand, but each unit of the same brand, has a certain unique color space than can be measured with a color measuring device and a color profile describing the color space can be created for it. If your document is assigned the color space of your monitor instead of some of the standard RGB color spaces like sRGB, AdobeRGB, and etc., then you will have an unique set of out of gamut colors showing the warning sign. So in your question you have to also specify which RGB color space you are talking about: standard or device specific?

Wide gamut options for iMac, what are they

We have a new iMac 22 inch model and when we try to calibrate it as a wide gamut monitor using Datacolor Spyder Studio we get the error that this is not a wide gamut monitor. *** I thought this was the ultimate in displays!
What do we have to do to get a wide gamut display? We really don't want to add a monitor

Color gamut is a bit worse on the new panel vs. the old one from what I can tell. Both are WLED backlit which limits the spectrum of colors they can accurately reproduce.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4340/27inch-apple-imac-review-2011/7
http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/50281286

Color space, Windows Media 9

Hi,
I´m using AE CS3 and try to render a Windows Media 9 file. But I don´t get the colors right. The blacks are too light and the whites too dark (I´ve checked the file in both VLC and Media Player). I guess it could be a color space issue. In AE I use HDTV (Rec. 709) color space. But not sure if this is the right choice. Have also tried not to use any color space, but that doesn´t help either. Thankful for any advice.
Thanks

Rec 709 as a project setting should not affect output in any way, as it covers the full 0-255 8bit RGB value ranges. They should only get limited when using other profiles and working in other bit-depths.. The only other thing that in my experience might cause color shifts is odd combinations of older Windows Media components with the latest AE. In these cases, the ranges may be misinterpreted. As a last thing, also check hardware acceleration options in your players. Sometimes simply a color otpion introduced by your graphics card can make things go crazy. In any case, I would, as a minor, update Windows Media player to the latest and see, if it helps.
Mylenium

Color Space Identity Plates

What color space should Identity Plates be in. Considering the fact that I do not know the working color space I am working in Lightroom with raw files. I am concerned about color space mismatches when printing (in the print module) a raw file and identity plate in a layout. How does Lightroom handle two files printed simultaneously like this in a layout. What is converted to what before it is converted to my printer profile. As it stands I have identity plates stored on disk as sRGB and they seem to be printing slightly darker than they should. Have tried converting them to a 1.8 (Prophoto) gamma space and no change.

In my experience, LR just does the right thing and translates whatever you have to the printer profile. It always comes out just right. Your observation seems to support that as you see no difference between sRGB and ppRGB. The difference in darkness might simply be a small calibration or monitor brightness issue.

FF9 not respecting wide gamut color space profile

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for