Imported Stills are Over-saturated

We're using PPro CS4 on a 64-bit Vista machine. We've imported video into our timeline and it looks fine. However, when we import the JPEGs we made in Photoshop CS4, they come in much more saturated than they show in Bridge. We've checked in Camera RAW and there are no adjustments being made to the JPEGs. We made the JPEGs color space to be sRGB. Two questions:
1. What color space does PPro use?
2. What is causing the over-saturation and what can we do to solve it besides manually adjusting each image within PPro?

This is likely because Bridge is Color Managed, while PrPro is not. The color space should be Adobe RGB (1998). What is the Color Space of the JPEG's?
Also, instead of JPEG's, have you considered keeping your still images in .PSD? I only use JPEG for delivery to Web clients, and never for Video, but then I am old-school, and all of my work is in Camera RAW to PSD, so just keep things in that format. Also, if you started with JPEG, and then did a Save_As JPEG, you HAVE recompressed the data, and this is seldom a good thing.
Good luck,
Hunt

Similar Messages

Loaded OMD raw pictures are over saturated

Hi Gang:
When loading a raw image from my beloved OMD the initial image shown (supposedly from the imbedded JPG) is reasonably saturated. When loading is complete the image shown (now supposedly from the RAW) is significantly over saturated. Why would the imbedded JPG appear reasonably saturated, but the RAW loaded image be overly saturated? This must have something to do with how Aperture handles raw OMD files. RAW Fine Tuning does not seem to help with this. Any ideas?
Thanks,
Jeff Stulin

Hi Jeff,
Is your monitor calibrated? With a hardware calibrator? Which one?
Do you have the most recent version of Aperture, and the most recent version of Apple's RAW converter (it is part of the OS; a new version came out this week)?
What you describe as the process of drawing the Image on the screen is correct. There is nothing "supposed" about it.
The JPG that is shown is (usually) prepared by the camera. It is possible that this image has been post-processed in-camera. Do you have any PP settings applied when you record exposures? Any "style" or anything else other than focus distance, focal length, ISO, aperture, and exposure duration?
What do you have set in Aperture Prefs for using the in-camera JPGs? (I don't have access to Aperture right now and can't tell which preferences tab this is on.)
It is odd that you aren't seeing changes when you make changes using the RAW Fine Tuning Brick. Nothing happens when you change the Hue Boost? Are you recording RAW+JPEG, or just RAW? If RAW+JPEG, which do you set as the Original (a/k/a "Master")?
(Sent from my magic glass.)

Over-Saturation

I was told by a couple of pro photographers on a web site I frequent that my photos are generally over-saturated. I have PSE 10 and almost always make the following edits:
- using the Quick selection, do an Autofix, then increase the Shadows, Highlights, and Midtones to bring out more definition
- using Full, do an Auto Levels, sometimes do an Auto Color Correction (depending on how it looks), and finally do a bit of sharpening using the Unsharp Mask
Rarely do I specifically adjust (increase) the saturation. So my questions are:
1) I think I have a general idea of when photos are over-saturated, but what specifically do you look for to indicate that they are?
2) do any of the PSE edits I am doing above implicitly change the saturation? If so, how can I modify my edits so as not to over-saturate?
3) can you take a look at some of my photos and give me your opinion as to whether they are over-saturated? The first photo of the butterfly in the photostream was specifically adjusted for saturation, but most of the other ones were not.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/98772145@N05/
Thanks.

I see the same thing if I edit the example fox image in the same ways as you've specified, although this particular image doesn't need much done to it, in my opinion, and so the oversaturation is less than some others.
I think you are on the right track saying out of the Quick Fix things, because these reduce the overall dynamic range more than a little and boost the saturation slightly so the net effect is an unnatural mismatch between the overall contrast and the saturation. Normally if you reduce contrast in a scene the colors are also muted but with your multiple iterations of fixes the opposite occurs.
The other comment is that the sharpness is being applied to things that don't deserve it, mainly noise, and the way you reduce this is to up the threshold a bit to avoid sharpening areas that don't have edges. I found that on the fox picture, a threshold around 15 seemed good, which sharpens the glint in the eyes and some of the fur that is in focus, but leaves the out-of-focus noisy areas alone.
You asked what you might do different, and I have two approaches to give, none of which use Quick or Auto fixes and actually take less steps. First is to use Levels and Shadows/Highlights which are both under Enhance / Adjust Lighting. The third option in this menu is Brightness/Contrast but the fox picture was almost ok so didn't really need any of that. Here are screen shots of the menu items and the adjustments I made to your photo using them:
First I used Levels to adjust the black point to 12 which was where the histogram ran out of values at the low end, and then boosted the overall brightness using the gamma slider to where it looked ok but not overly bright. In this example I used 1.20. With a different sort of picture, you might need to move the white-point down to where the histogram ran out of values on the bright end but this picture had pure white already in it, so that wasn't necessary. The Auto Levels command actually does the black and white point adjustments but it overdoes them a little so I like using the Levels black and white point sliders to be more precise:
Next I did like how you brought out a little more detail in the highlights, so used Shadows/Highlights to compress the light values slightly, and also used the Midtone Contrast to give the textures of the image a little more pop:
None of this increased the saturation appreciably nor compressed the dynamic range so much to make things seem unnatural.
I left your sharpening except using a threshold of 15 as I stated, above. This image was quite blurry so it probably needed more sharpening attention using different radii and perhaps the other sharpening tool, but I didn't want to spend time with that since the most obvious issue at hand was oversaturation.
The second technique, which is a bit more radical but more useful in my opinion, is to open the JPG in the Camera Raw plug-in despite not being a raw format file. This has the advantage of having all the toning sliders available at once without having to go though various menus and buttons to find each small set of adjustments and also just one Auto button to click, though usually I back off most of what the Auto decided for me but it's still something quick to try at the beginning. There is also better sharpening and noise reduction.
Ok, to open a non-raw file in the Camera Raw plug-in, you can use File / Open As... and after choosing the image, set the File Type to Camera Raw, then click Open:
Here is your original image opened in Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) with all the toning adjustments at zero:
Below is how I adjusted the toning sliders. I had first clicked Auto and didn't like how it was too dark, so I only left the Blacks at +1 from that, and reset or readjusted everything else. The overall image seemed a little dark to me so I increased the Exposure by half-a-stop, but that washed out the highlights so I dialed them back by setting Highlights to -87, just so there was some detail in the chin fur and foreground rock. Finally I increased the Clarity, which inreases the contrast of the textures, and finally I added a tiny bit of Vibrance. If I had adjusted the blackopint down quite a bit, then that might have oversaturated everything, and I could have addressed that by merely setting the Vibrance or Saturation to a slightly negative value. I also like a little bit extra color in my processing, so a slight bit of added Vibrance seemed good to me. The Vibrance slider is different than Saturation in that it doesn't boost skin tones (reds/oranges/yellows) as much as the greens and blues, so it works to increase color in people pictures without overdoing their skin. I've put the original to the right on the same line so it's easier to compare:
Besides toning you can do detail adjustment, which involves sharpening and noise-reduction. Here is the face portion of the originally processed image at 100% if you click on it. The first thing you'll notice is that all the grainy noise is sharpened even in areas that are out of focus or blurred due to the left-right camera motion, and the other thing to notice is the green and mostly reddish-purple splotches of color noise that weren't quite all removed in camera:
Here are the Sharpness and Noise-Reduction settings I settled on after a few minutes:
The main thing to notice is that the only sharpened parts are the ones that have relatively sharp details, the glint in the eyes and the fur on their side of the eyes and a bit of the whiskers. The rest is mostly out of focus. For a better shot, without the camera motion, the sharpening settings might have been entirely different. The way I accomplished only sharpening the edges that where relatively sharp already and ignoring the noise and other out-of-focus areas was with the Sharpen Masking setting, which is 77 in this case. This is somewhat similar to the threshold setting of the sharpening in the regular Unsharp Mask in PSE, but it has a way to set it visually, by holding down the Alt key while sliding the Masking slider back and forth until only the bolder edges are shown:
I see in this screenshot that I had the Detail slider set to 5, which was probably better than the 25 I used in the screenshot, above. The other thing to notice is the Luminance and Color sliders in the Noise Reduction area are set to reduce the tiny specs of noise and the green/purple splotches.
One thing I need to mention about using Camera Raw is that I think in PSE10 the highest version you can update to may be ACR 6.7 which won't have the same set of toning sliders as in my example--I hacked a version of the 7.1 beta plug-in to use with it to get the new sliders, but normally you would have those available in PSE10 I don't think. You would need to use PSE11 or better yet, wait for PSE12 which comes out in another week or two.
This new method of toning and detail adjustment works ok with images one-by-one via File / Open, but it isn't that efficient ot use for many images. The best thing for that that isn't expensive Photoshop, would be to get Lightroom, which has these same adjustments but also optimized to work with dozens, hundreds, or more images from one photoshoot. The other benefit to Lightroom is that you can use a wide array of filters and brushes that are limited in the Elements-hosted version of the Camera Raw plug-in.
Remember when I said I thought the overall fox picture was too dark, well what is really wrong is the fox is too dark and I could care less about the rocks and other non-important background items. Here is a version of the same fox picture using Lightroom's radial filter to darken the surroundings so the fox is more prominent. The one without the radial filter darkening is at the right:
Lightroom is currently on sale for $129.99 and upgrades are $79.99 with a 30-day trial version available for download if you want to try it:
http://www.adobe.com/lightroom/

Dim Screen and Over saturation Mac Pro 1,1 - 10.6.5

Hi I have read a bunch about this issue but cant seem to find a resolution. I recently upgraded from 10.5 to 10.6. I am currently running 10.6.5 and I am experiencing a weird issue with my display. It appears much darker and the colors are over saturated.
I have heard that this is because the apple changed the gamma from 1.8 to 2.0 (or 2.2... i forget) anyway. The screen looks awful. I have tried other profiles, recalibration, etc... with no luck. However while the computer is on if I simply pull the dvi connection out of the machine and put it back in it reverts to a traditional gamma, saturation and overall appearance of what the screen looked like in 10.5.
Now although I think it is really absurd that I need to do this I dont care that much EXCEPT this solution does NOT work with the secondary display port. I will pull the dvi out and plug it back in and the secondary screen is still very dark and saturated. I noticed it first in 10.6.4 and was hoping the issue would be resolved in 10.6.5 update but no luck.
Whats the deal?
Is there any solution to get the traditional saturation, color and brightness of my displays restored?
Just so you have a little background on myself, I am an IT technician of 5 years and a digital artist of 10 years. I do not believe that this issue can be resolved with recalibrating the display profile because I have tried it (many times). I REALLY hope this is not the new standard.
If it is see ya later 10.6! Hello 10.5.
Thanks in advance

Although it seems like a pain, I think it best to clean install. Reason only being, you want to cut out as many variables as you can.
If you have a spare drive, just install 10.6 on there just for experimenting; you don't need to install any programs. You just wanna eliminate all variables, so see if and if so, where up until (10.6.3?) the problem arises.
A clean install is fast, especially with snow. 20-30 min maybe? Run diskwarrior after that if you have it too.
Also, what happens when you adjust the brightness? Does it just stay dark? (I'm just trying to grasp what the "darkness" looks like)

My photos look over saturated when opened in CS6

When i look at my photos in Ulead Instant Viewer or Breeze Browser Pro they look similar to what they did on the back of my camera.
But when i view them in my newly purchased CS6 the saturation is increased by around 25 to 30 units.
When i scanned some 35mm colour negatives and viewed them in photoshop they had exactly the same saturation as when viewed in Ulead Instant Viewer and Breeze Browser Pro.
Can anyone help please?

CS6 the saturation is increased by around 25 to 30 units.
if Photoshop is not displaying your RGB faithfully, either your monitor profile is off or Photoshop is being configured to use (or assume) the wrong soure profile (it is possible your problem documents are over saturated and Photoshop is only displaying the problem)
i would have you download the PDI WhackedRGB.jpg and see what happens in your apps...
tip: if you confirm Photoshop is indeed using the whacked source profile, and it is not displaying proper, I would suspect your monitor profile (try Edit>Color Settings> Settings> North American Prepress 2 for now - then quit Photoshop and reopen the Whacked test image, "Use the embedded profile")...

Greens from my Nikon D800 are way over saturated and too bluish 14 bit NEF

Greens from my Nikon D800 are way over saturated and too bluish 14 bit NEF uncompressed files. I have no problem with raw files from other cameras is there a setting I am missing somewhere?

Hi,
I have been shooting my D800 for over a year now, and I have not observed what you are discussing, particularly in outdoor, natural light situations.
I have downloaded your NEF, and imported it into Aperture (3.4.5). I notice two things right away: 1) you are using Uncompressed NEF, 14 bit recording; and 2) you seem to have a custom White Balance. The former should be of no matter, but would be interested if you have been able to discern any advantage over Lossless Compression, 14 bit?
However, the important concern is with the Custom White Balance impact on the rendering of NEFs in RAW in Aperture. I am planning to do a study of this, and am wondering if you could test your resutls in similar shots with Auto White Balance rather than any preset (yours or the camera standard presets)?
I by practice only shoot Auto White Balance (and RAW), but recently I have found benefit to using a preset WB when shooting video since that result will not be modifiable later on the computer. After doing this, I have sometimes forgotten to reset the WB to Auto before again shooting stills in RAW, and the resulting difference vs once reset has been curious.
While it is well known that Picture Controls when used and shooting RAW will likely result in wide differences between the Camera Preview and Aperture's first rendering, I am less certain what the dynamics of White Balance settings and first rendering in Aperture.
Thanks for the test image and chance to discuss this.
Ernie

LR3: Exports are dark and over-saturated

... or: LR3 shows everything dull and to light...
I've upload an image and described my problem her:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tcdk/4753052290/
But here it is:
I'm having some color and curve problems with my exports, it all looks to dark and to saturated when I export from Lightroom 3. So I'm trying to figure out what's happening.
Here's the setup:
Windows XP
Nvidia 8600GT graphics card
One Dell 2407WFPHC screen
One Dell 2408WFP screen (my main)
Huey Pro color calibration kit (software version 1.51)
Everything calibrated. It looks good to me when I import in lightroom (from raw from Pentax K20D, and Panasonic LX3)
Exporting to jpeg (sRGB) or tiff and viewing in anything else the colors are darker and over-saturated (tried in firefox (profile aware), Internet Explorer, irfanview and chrome). Loading the jpeg into Lightroom and comparing it to the RAW, they look the same (not dark or over-saturated).
What you see above is a screen grab, of a test chart viewed in Lightroom and IrfanView. They where just imported/loaded - nothing was done. No development settings are applied as part of my LR3 import.
The colors in lightroom 3 are dull compared to the IrfanView.
Sample rgb values:
1 red:
Lightroom 224,52,27 (not that pure)
Irfanview 254,0,0 (~pure red)
4 purple:
Lightroom: 124,1,251
irfanview: 131,0,254
9 green:
lightroom: 126,255,54 (far from pure green)
irfanview: 0,255,3 (pure green)
The red and the green are the worst - a lot more "energy" in them. So imagine the reverse process. I've a photo in Lightroom and it looks good to me. I export it and every 126,255,54 gets made into pure green. Darker and over-saturated!
I've no idea what's happning or what to do about it. I've tried everything I can think about.
I don't really think I had this issue with LR2 - not enough to notice anyway.
System info:
Lightroom version: 3.0 [677000]
Operating system: Microsoft Windows XP Professional Service Pack 3 (Build 2600)
Version: 5.1 [2600]
Application architecture: x86
System architecture: x86
Physical processor count: 2
Processor speed: 1,8 GHz
Built-in memory: 3007,1 MB
Real memory available to Lightroom: 716,8 MB
Real memory used by Lightroom: 278,4 MB (38,8%)
Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 266,7 MB
Memory cache size: 49,7 MB
System DPI setting: 96 DPI
Displays: 1) 1200x1920, 2) 1920x1200
Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3
Library Path: P:\Lightroom\Lightroom 3 Catalog\Lightroom 3 Catalog\Lightroom 3 Catalog.lrcat
Settings Folder: C:\Documents and Settings\Thomas Christensen\Application Data\Adobe\Lightroom

So in my case it seems I'm better off running uncalibrated as that seems to produce something more natural across the board than when I use calibration and it goes between extremes, fine or totally wrong... I can see the images fine on my controlled environment but if you're distributing online then things don't work out at all!
This is a very common misconception. Needless to say it is wrong. the only way you can get reasonable colors on everybody else's monitors is to calibrate your display and only trust color managed apps. If you don't calibrate and don't use color managed apps, your output will basically be completely random. At least with calibration and management you will be targeting the standard (sRGB) that most monitors cluster around (that's what they were designed to), so while individual monitors will be more or less random, on average they will show what you intended. If you don't calibrate and manage you will target only your specific monitor. Since this is a wide gamut display, the average viewer (who doesn't calibrate nor color manage) will see a dull desaturated image with respect to what you see.
Bottom line: If you use a wide gamut monitor, calibrate and only trust color managed apps. If you have a normal gamut monitor, calibrate and trust color managed apps the most, but non managed apps will be OK if you use sRGB as your export space. You cannot do away with the calibration step if you care about what others will see.

The old version of iPhoto would not import my photos from my iPhone and now there are over 11,000 of them, how do I erase these unwanted photos?

I had the older version of iPhoto and it was allowing me to start the import from my iPhone but would unexpetcadly quit leaving all of the photos uniported and added duplicates of each one every time I opened iPhoto so that now there are over 11,000 of them. I have the newest version now and I was hoping there would be a way to erase them but I still cannot figure it out. Does anyone know how to erase the 11,000+ unwanted photos from the program?
Thank you
Heather

So, are you gettting a message at start up? If so try:
Go to your Pictures Folder and find the iPhoto Library there. Right (or Control-) Click on the icon and select 'Show Package Contents'. A finder window will open with the Library exposed.
Look there for a Folder called 'Import' or 'Importing'.
Drag it to the Desktop. *Make no other changes*.
Start iPhoto. Does that help?
If it does then look inside that folder on your desktop. Does it contain anything you want? If not you can trash the folder.

When importing from my camera or file in Lightroom 5 my pictures are over-exposed by 1-2 stops, while they are well exposed on the camera-screen. How to get the 'right-exposed pictures on the screen?

When importing from my camera or file in Lightroom 5 my pictures are over-exposed by 1-2 stops, while they are well exposed on the camera-screen. How to get the 'right-exposed pictures on the screen?

There is an option in your Lightroom preferences on the General tab, "Treat JPEG files next to raw files as separate images". If you have that option checked then Lightroom will import and display both your raw and JPEG files. Are you using active D-lighting on your camera? If you are then you need to turn off that feature.

90 days are over and still unable to sync

I had an old itunes account with old style format for apple ID. When I bought a new iPOD touch and tried to sync it to my library, it forced me to change apple ID to email based format. It said I had to wait 90 days for my old library (on computer) to sync with my new iPOD touch. 90 days are over and my old library will still not sync. Any suggestions

I think you may have some misunderstanding about the 90 days since I never heard of that except for:
iTunes Store: Associating a device or computer to your Apple ID
What happens when you try to sync?
Are you following the correct instructions?
To sync to your iPod go to iTunes>Help>iTunes Help>Sync your iPod.... and follow the instructions.
Is the iPod and iTunes sing into the updated account? You first have to sign out and sing back in.

HT201302 Even though there are over 200 photos on my ipad, after trying both methods of importing and connecting with a lead, a message appears saying that there are no photos on this device. Any ideas?

Even though there are over 200 photos on my ipad, after trying both methods of importing and connecting with a lead, a message appears saying that there are no photos on this device. Any ideas?

Did you connect your iPad to your computer then open the application on your computer that transfers photos from a camera? Your computer should recognize the iPad as a camera. All photos in the Camera Roll on the iPad should then be seen and you should be able to copy them to the computer using that application.
Photos that were synced to your iPad by connecting to your syncing computer cannot be copied back this way as the master file for those photos are on the syncing computer.

Png files are over each other in the iphoto import window

When i connect my iphone to the mac to import photos in iphoto, the png files are over each other in the iphoto import window. Jpegs are also showing up in the iphoto grid with new photos but each box contains 1 photo, which is normal. With png pictures, iphoto puts up to 3 pictures on top of each other in each box.
Anybody has seen this before?
Kind regards,
Jeff Dehaes

oops, sorry, re-installed iphoto and it works again, they weren't even png's just jpegs...
Problem solved.

My stills are all over the place when I export them. How can I have them play as they appear on the Viewer?

Hello everyone.
When I exported my video (all stills), the images are all over the place. I had adjusted the postition (X & Y) for each one, and when I exported the video, the stills are not staying in one place, but are coming from different angles and different positions. How can I fix it so that when exported, it plays as it does on my Viewer?
Thank you!

First, I'd try deleting all render files in both the associated Events and Projects (File menu). Do not render before exporting.
"Preference Manager" is a free download from Digital Rebellion (dot com) you can delete the FCP X pref files quickly, easily, safely. Try that next.

Deskjet 1010 over saturated colors

This is my first HP printer. I have had it only a few days and am very disappointed with prints from my photographs.
The prints have over saturated colors and are too warm, resulting in a dark, muddy appearance.
For mant years, I have used Canon printers that have allowed me to adjust color balance and density.
I was surprised to that these facilities are not available with HP software.
Is there any way I can get the print quality that I want?

HI , Welcome to the HP Support Forums! I see that you're experiencing quality issues, while printing photos on your HP Deskjet 1010 Printer. I would like to assist you with this. Due to the nature of the issue, I may require more information. What operating system are you using? How to Find the Windows Edition and Version on Your Computer.What operating system are you using? Mac OS X: How Do I Find Which Mac OS X Version Is on My Computer? To see if the correct driver is installed please try: Please download and run the Print and Scan Doctor, it will likely diagnose and resolve the issue you are experiencing. Please let me know the results of the steps I have recommended. Note: The Print and Scan Doctor is for Windows Operating Systems. Do colour prints look good on regular paper?
What type of paper are you using when you're printing photos? Did you specify the Paper Type when printing, in the print settings? Note: If you aren't using HP Photo Paper, select Other Photo Paper. The printer is programmed to know HP Paper, the speed and saturation of the Ink will depend on the type of paper you're using. Therefore, if you're using none HP Paper, and the print settings are set for HP Photo Paper, you will see these results. Printing Photos- Manual Load photo paper1. Make sure the output tray is open.2. IMPORTANT: Remove all paper from the paper input tray, and then load the photo paper with side to be printed on facing up. To print a photo on photo paper1. On the File menu in your software, click Print.2.Make sure your printer is selected.3. Click the button that opens the Properties dialog box. Depending on your software application, this button might be called Properties, Options, Printer Setup, Printer Properties, Printer, or Preferences.4. Select the appropriate options.● On the Layout tab, select Portrait or Landscape orientation.● On the Paper/Quality tab, select the appropriate paper type and print quality from the Media drop-down list.● Click Advanced to select the appropriate paper size from the Paper Size drop-down list. NOTE: For maximum dpi resolution, go to the Paper/Quality tab and select Photo Paper,Best Quality from the Media drop-down list. Then go to the Advanced tab and select Yes from the Print in Max DPI drop-down list. If you want to print Max DPI in grayscale, select High Quality Grayscale from the Print in Grayscale drop-down list.5. Click OK to return to the Properties dialog box.6. Click OK, and then click Print or OK in the Print dialog box. NOTE: After the printing is finished, remove unused photo paper from the input tray. Store the photo paper so it does not start to curl, which could reduce the quality of your printout I would try the steps within this guide, Fixing Print Quality Problems. If you need further assistance, please let me know the following information above. Please respond to this post with the result of your troubleshooting. I look forward to hearing from you. Good Luck!

Over saturated Images in Safari

I'm experiencing an issue where Safari shows images optimised for the web in a very over saturated form.
It is really driving me mad!
My MackBook Pro and 23" apple LCD are both colour calibrated using the Spyder2Pro colouromitor. I use those profiles for the screens and the colours are great.
Here's my workflow:
- My camera is set to use Adobe RGB 1998 icc profile
- I take images in RAW format and import them into Aperture (ver 1.5).
- When I have made any adjustments I export them from Apertue into jpeg format
- I have set-up Aperture to use the sRGB colour space when exporting images into jpeg format from Aperture (the images will mainly be used for the web which is why I use sRGB)
- I open the images using Photoshop and use the 'optimise for web' feature to keep the file size low
- I select the option that says 'embed icc profile'
- Photoshop then embeds the sRGB icc profile in the image
If I look at the image, it looks just fine in Photoshop or any other image viewing program. If I then open it in Safari it looks way over sturated.
I have tried everything and I just can't work it out.
I've even tried setting my monitor colour space to that of sRGB to see if it makes any difference, and it doesn't.
However, if I choose NOT to embedd the icc profile in the image, then Safari opens the image and it looks just like the jpeg when I view it within Photohop or any other image veiwer.
I can view the images using Internet Explorer on a Windows PC and they appear to be fine. I guess thats because IE ignores colour profiles where Safari will use them if they exist.
It seems Safari is reading the colour profile incorrectly in the image.
Can anyone tell me whats going on?

Hi
I can sympathise with how annoying this must be - and although I haven't looked into it myself, I do recall several other posts over the last 18months or so, with the same issue.
I can't dig out the exact posts now, but maybe the following might lead somewhere?
http://webkit.org/blog/73/color-spaces/
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302827
http://www.gballard.net/psd/golive_pageprofile/embeddedJPEGprofiles.html
sorry I can't locate the threads I remember- I found one or two, but they were un-answered.

Imported Stills are Over-saturated

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for