If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Sun, 21 May 2017 20:43:10 -0400, nospam
wrote: In article , Eric Stevens wrote: The article author suggests recommending to Windows users that they install Safari before viewing your photos. Good luck with that, as the saying goes. It's roughly analogous to telling your friend what stove to use. That advice is many years out of date. My web browser (Firefox) is color managed, my screens have been color calibrated for nearly 10 years and Windows has had one form of color management or another since 1995. what form was it in 1995? wikipedia says 1997, 4 years after macos did. I was relying on https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms969981.aspx which says: "Microsoft Corporation's first implementation of color management support was released in the Microsoft® Windows® 95 operating system as Integrated Color Management (ICM) 1.0, an API to which third-party applications can write. This version of ICM was designed to address the needs of applications that work with RGB, to work seamlessly for the end user, and to enable simple support from application developers." Windows 95 was of course released on Aug 24 1995. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Color_management#Operating_system_level Apple's classic Mac OS and macOS operating systems have provided OS-level color management APIs since 1993, through ColorSync. Since 1997 color management in Windows is available through an ICC color management system (ICM). As of 2005, most web browsers ignored color profiles. Notable exceptions were Safari, starting with version 2.0, and Firefox starting with version 3. Although disabled by default in Firefox 3.0, ICC v2 and ICC v4 color management could be enable by using an add-on or setting a configuration option. As of 2012, notable browser support for color management is: € Firefox: from version 3.5 enabled by default for ICC v2 tagged images, version 8.0 has ICC v4 profiles support, but it needs to be activated manually. € Internet Explorer: version 9 is the first Microsoft browser to partly support ICC profiles, but it does not render images correctly according to the Windows ICC settings (it only converts non-sRGB images to the sRGB profile) and therefore provides no real color management at all. € Google Chrome: uses the system provided ICC v2 and v4 support on macOS, and from version 22 supports ICC v2 profiles by default on other platforms. € Safari: has support starting with version 2.0. € Opera: has support since 12.10 for ICC v4. € Pale Moon supported ICC v2 from its first release, and v4 since Pale Moon 20.2 (2013). looks like mayayana's pet browser is colour managed and he doesn't even know it. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
"Eric Stevens" wrote
| In | the course of the article, the author demonstrates | how even different browsers, given the same | conditions (same OS, color management, | monitor, etc) can actually render different hues | for the exact same color value. | | Which is why images should contain color profiles if you want accurate | reproduction of colours. | I'll try one more time to clarify this because it's an important point. Even if you don't get it, some people will. As I said, the article is pointing out that *even with color management and use of profiles* there will be differences in display between browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating his main point, that you just can't control what other people see. From the description below that image: "Note that even the browsers that recognize nonstandard color profiles don't all implement the monitor color profile the same way, with each successive browser bringing up the black levels (and IE9 really pumps the saturation!)." And browsers are just one factor. You're applying the logic of calibrating hardware to the vagaries of software. Yes, you can use color management to coordinate your printer with your monitor. But you cannot, no matter how hard you try, control what other people see when they view your photo. Even if you insisted that all recipients calibrate their hardware before they can view your images, which obviously wouldn't be realistic, you still can't be sure of what they'll see. (And that, of course, still doesn't take into account variations in color perception between people. I'm, only pointing out software differences here, which is a relatively small part of the equation.) | Firefox is fully color managed and SD will be able to confirm whether | or not he included a color profile with his picture. And don't forget | you have Dropbox in between. That wasn't the point of that example. I was pointing out that the same image was showing differently in 2 different programs on the same computer. Dropbox is not "in between". I viewed the Dropbox-derived image in Firefox and then right-click-saved it to disk to view it in IrfanView. Neither image came directly from SD. They're the same file. They looked different, and it wasn't a color issue. I can't explain it. The only thing I can think of is that maybe Firefox is using its own graphics libraries and, for some reason, adjusting display. Normally software would be sending image pixel values to the screen using the Windows GDI library. There shouldn't be any difference. A pixel is a pixel. Maybe it's me, but anyone on Windows can test this easily enough. You could download his DSF4740-E.jpg and see what you think. Maybe they'll look exactly the same to you. But the saturation and sharpness clearly look different to me. You're not curious to know whether different software might convey such differences? (Probably having nothing to do with color management.) I think part of the issue here is that people who do work on computers would like to think that digital work can be made relatively immutable. It just doesn't work that way. Office people like to think that PDFs and DOCs are immutable vehicles for copyrighted material. They're not. Photographers would like to think that JPGs are relatively immutable vehicles for their photos. They're not. That's just how the medium works. The JPG graphic image data is just a grid of numeric pixel values. Graphic editing is just the most obvious example of how mutable the image is. Of course, printed media are not so immutable as they seem, either. Your photo will look different under glass than without; different under halogen light than under daylight; different to each person; different depending on the direction light is coming from; different due to the colors used for the mat and frame. We imagine a physical print is immutable because it's a physical object. But even our color perception is just an approximation. We don't have cones for perceiving yellow, for example. Which is why it's so hard to get a pure yellow that doesn't tip toward green or red. Because yellow itself is a relationship between the greens and reds that our eye registers. And probably everyone has had the experience of viewing a flag and then staring at a white wall to see a flag in opposing colors. Those colors are not there. They exist only as a quirk of our physiology. |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On Thu, 25 May 2017 09:17:52 -0400, "Mayayana"
wrote: "Eric Stevens" wrote | In | the course of the article, the author demonstrates | how even different browsers, given the same | conditions (same OS, color management, | monitor, etc) can actually render different hues | for the exact same color value. | | Which is why images should contain color profiles if you want accurate | reproduction of colours. | I'll try one more time to clarify this because it's an important point. Even if you don't get it, some people will. As I said, the article is pointing out that *even with color management and use of profiles* there will be differences in display between browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating his main point, that you just can't control what other people see. From the description below that image: "Note that even the browsers that recognize nonstandard color profiles don't all implement the monitor color profile the same way, with each successive browser bringing up the black levels (and IE9 really pumps the saturation!)." And browsers are just one factor. You're applying the logic of calibrating hardware to the vagaries of software. Yes, you can use color management to coordinate your printer with your monitor. But you cannot, no matter how hard you try, control what other people see when they view your photo. Even if you insisted that all recipients calibrate their hardware before they can view your images, which obviously wouldn't be realistic, you still can't be sure of what they'll see. (And that, of course, still doesn't take into account variations in color perception between people. I'm, only pointing out software differences here, which is a relatively small part of the equation.) | Firefox is fully color managed and SD will be able to confirm whether | or not he included a color profile with his picture. And don't forget | you have Dropbox in between. That wasn't the point of that example. I was pointing out that the same image was showing differently in 2 different programs on the same computer. Dropbox is not "in between". I viewed the Dropbox-derived image in Firefox and then right-click-saved it to disk to view it in IrfanView. Neither image came directly from SD. They're the same file. They looked different, and it wasn't a color issue. I can't explain it. The only thing I can think of is that maybe Firefox is using its own graphics libraries and, for some reason, adjusting display. Normally software would be sending image pixel values to the screen using the Windows GDI library. There shouldn't be any difference. A pixel is a pixel. Is your computer screen calibrated? Do you have the necessary plugins? Maybe it's me, but anyone on Windows can test this easily enough. You could download his DSF4740-E.jpg and see what you think. I would like to but I can't find the original link. Maybe they'll look exactly the same to you. But the saturation and sharpness clearly look different to me. You're not curious to know whether different software might convey such differences? (Probably having nothing to do with color management.) I think part of the issue here is that people who do work on computers would like to think that digital work can be made relatively immutable. It just doesn't work that way. Office people like to think that PDFs and DOCs are immutable vehicles for copyrighted material. They're not. Photographers would like to think that JPGs are relatively immutable vehicles for their photos. They're not. That's just how the medium works. The JPG graphic image data is just a grid of numeric pixel values. Graphic editing is just the most obvious example of how mutable the image is. Of course, printed media are not so immutable as they seem, either. Your photo will look different under glass than without; different under halogen light than under daylight; different to each person; different depending on the direction light is coming from; different due to the colors used for the mat and frame. We imagine a physical print is immutable because it's a physical object. But even our color perception is just an approximation. We don't have cones for perceiving yellow, for example. Which is why it's so hard to get a pure yellow that doesn't tip toward green or red. Because yellow itself is a relationship between the greens and reds that our eye registers. And probably everyone has had the experience of viewing a flag and then staring at a white wall to see a flag in opposing colors. Those colors are not there. They exist only as a quirk of our physiology. -- Regards, Eric Stevens |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On 2017-05-25 22:53:06 +0000, Eric Stevens said:
On Thu, 25 May 2017 09:17:52 -0400, "Mayayana" wrote: "Eric Stevens" wrote | In | the course of the article, the author demonstrates | how even different browsers, given the same | conditions (same OS, color management, | monitor, etc) can actually render different hues | for the exact same color value. | | Which is why images should contain color profiles if you want accurate | reproduction of colours. | I'll try one more time to clarify this because it's an important point. Even if you don't get it, some people will. As I said, the article is pointing out that *even with color management and use of profiles* there will be differences in display between browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating his main point, that you just can't control what other people see. From the description below that image: "Note that even the browsers that recognize nonstandard color profiles don't all implement the monitor color profile the same way, with each successive browser bringing up the black levels (and IE9 really pumps the saturation!)." And browsers are just one factor. You're applying the logic of calibrating hardware to the vagaries of software. Yes, you can use color management to coordinate your printer with your monitor. But you cannot, no matter how hard you try, control what other people see when they view your photo. Even if you insisted that all recipients calibrate their hardware before they can view your images, which obviously wouldn't be realistic, you still can't be sure of what they'll see. (And that, of course, still doesn't take into account variations in color perception between people. I'm, only pointing out software differences here, which is a relatively small part of the equation.) | Firefox is fully color managed and SD will be able to confirm whether | or not he included a color profile with his picture. And don't forget | you have Dropbox in between. That wasn't the point of that example. I was pointing out that the same image was showing differently in 2 different programs on the same computer. Dropbox is not "in between". I viewed the Dropbox-derived image in Firefox and then right-click-saved it to disk to view it in IrfanView. Neither image came directly from SD. They're the same file. They looked different, and it wasn't a color issue. I can't explain it. The only thing I can think of is that maybe Firefox is using its own graphics libraries and, for some reason, adjusting display. Normally software would be sending image pixel values to the screen using the Windows GDI library. There shouldn't be any difference. A pixel is a pixel. Is your computer screen calibrated? Do you have the necessary plugins? Maybe it's me, but anyone on Windows can test this easily enough. You could download his DSF4740-E.jpg and see what you think. I would like to but I can't find the original link. Since that is my JPEG, I am happy to oblige; https://www.dropbox.com/s/448rl27c57zsiye/DSF4740-E.jpg Maybe they'll look exactly the same to you. But the saturation and sharpness clearly look different to me. You're not curious to know whether different software might convey such differences? (Probably having nothing to do with color management.) -- Regards, Savageduck |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: As I said, the article is pointing out that *even with color management and use of profiles* there will be differences in display between browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating his main point, that you just can't control what other people see. only if the browsers aren't colour managed. And browsers are just one factor. You're applying the logic of calibrating hardware to the vagaries of software. browsers are software. it could be an image viewer, photo editor or some other app. doesn't matter. Yes, you can use color management to coordinate your printer with your monitor. you can, but that's a bad idea and not how it should be done. it also indicates that you don't understand colour management. But you cannot, no matter how hard you try, control what other people see when they view your photo. while you can't 'control' anything (nor was that ever a goal), you absolutely can ensure that an image is visually consistent across multiple devices. Even if you insisted that all recipients calibrate their hardware before they can view your images, which obviously wouldn't be realistic, you still can't be sure of what they'll see. wrong. (And that, of course, still doesn't take into account variations in color perception between people. I'm, only pointing out software differences here, which is a relatively small part of the equation.) people perceive colours in the same way. if someone says they see bright red, another person will also see bright red, not azure, lemon, russet or grey. They looked different, and it wasn't a color issue. I can't explain it. The only thing I can think of is that maybe Firefox is using its own graphics libraries and, for some reason, adjusting display. Normally software would be sending image pixel values to the screen using the Windows GDI library. There shouldn't be any difference. A pixel is a pixel. one app is colour managed and the other isn't. simple as that. add in your lack of understanding of colour management and you end up with a complete mess. Maybe it's me, it is. but anyone on Windows can test this easily enough. You could download his DSF4740-E.jpg and see what you think. Maybe they'll look exactly the same to you. But the saturation and sharpness clearly look different to me. You're not curious to know whether different software might convey such differences? (Probably having nothing to do with color management.) a difference in sharpness is due to a ****ty resizing algorithm in one (possibly both) of the apps. saturation is a colour management issue. |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
On 5/25/2017 8:07 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Mayayana wrote: As I said, the article is pointing out that *even with color management and use of profiles* there will be differences in display between browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating his main point, that you just can't control what other people see. only if the browsers aren't colour managed. And browsers are just one factor. You're applying the logic of calibrating hardware to the vagaries of software. browsers are software. it could be an image viewer, photo editor or some other app. doesn't matter. Yes, you can use color management to coordinate your printer with your monitor. you can, but that's a bad idea and not how it should be done. it also indicates that you don't understand colour management. But you cannot, no matter how hard you try, control what other people see when they view your photo. while you can't 'control' anything (nor was that ever a goal), you absolutely can ensure that an image is visually consistent across multiple devices. True Even if you insisted that all recipients calibrate their hardware before they can view your images, which obviously wouldn't be realistic, you still can't be sure of what they'll see. wrong. See below (And that, of course, still doesn't take into account variations in color perception between people. I'm, only pointing out software differences here, which is a relatively small part of the equation.) people perceive colours in the same way. if someone says they see bright red, another person will also see bright red, not azure, lemon, russet or grey. Individual perceptions of color may vary from one individual to another, just as taste, and hearing do. http://www.livescience.com/21275-color-red-blue-scientists.html They looked different, and it wasn't a color issue. I can't explain it. The only thing I can think of is that maybe Firefox is using its own graphics libraries and, for some reason, adjusting display. Normally software would be sending image pixel values to the screen using the Windows GDI library. There shouldn't be any difference. A pixel is a pixel. one app is colour managed and the other isn't. simple as that. add in your lack of understanding of colour management and you end up with a complete mess. Maybe it's me, it is. but anyone on Windows can test this easily enough. You could download his DSF4740-E.jpg and see what you think. Maybe they'll look exactly the same to you. But the saturation and sharpness clearly look different to me. You're not curious to know whether different software might convey such differences? (Probably having nothing to do with color management.) a difference in sharpness is due to a ****ty resizing algorithm in one (possibly both) of the apps. saturation is a colour management issue. -- PeterN |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , PeterN
wrote: (And that, of course, still doesn't take into account variations in color perception between people. I'm, only pointing out software differences here, which is a relatively small part of the equation.) people perceive colours in the same way. if someone says they see bright red, another person will also see bright red, not azure, lemon, russet or grey. Individual perceptions of color may vary from one individual to another, just as taste, and hearing do. nope. this was well established long ago not to be true. http://www.livescience.com/21275-color-red-blue-scientists.html In work published in the journal Nature in 2009, Neitz and several colleagues injected a virus into the monkeys' eyes that randomly infected some of their green-sensitive cone cells duh. they need a study to figure out that infecting some of the cells in an eye will affect perception? the fact remains that people with normal vision see colours the same. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
"nospam" wrote
| As I said, the article is pointing | out that *even with color management and use of | profiles* there will be differences in display between | browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating | his main point, that you just can't control what other | people see. | | only if the browsers aren't colour managed. | You just snipped the quote making exactly the opposite point. Read the article and look at the comparison pictures. 3 yellow cars, all different hues. 3 different color-managing browsers. Why is this simple point so hard to grasp? |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
"PeterN" wrote
| Individual perceptions of color may vary from one individual to another, | just as taste, and hearing do. | http://www.livescience.com/21275-color-red-blue-scientists.html | That's one of several uncontrollable factors that I was trying to point out to Eric. I used to have a friend who took up painting and was surprisingly good at it. He was doing still life. I said I though his work was very good, but didn't understand why his pears were purple and various other things had been painted the wrong colors. It turned out he was color blind and had never known it. Yet his paintings were beautifully done, looking very realistic. He just wasn't painting the colors that other people saw. It was intriguing, but he was embarassed by the whole thing and stopped painting, so I never had a chance to figure out how he was painting so right and so wrong at the same time. Up until that point, it never would have occurred to me, if I said something like, "Isn't that a beautiful coral?", that he was actually seeing a very different color. And what does that mean? Does he see something equally exquisite but more like frog green? I don't know. Where would be the objective vantage point to decide? Is green to him the same as green to me? Or does it "feel" like coral? |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Is Your Browser Color Managed?
In article , Mayayana
wrote: | As I said, the article is pointing | out that *even with color management and use of | profiles* there will be differences in display between | browsers. He even shows a sample image, illustrating | his main point, that you just can't control what other | people see. | | only if the browsers aren't colour managed. | You just snipped the quote making exactly the opposite point. Read the article and look at the comparison pictures. 3 yellow cars, all different hues. 3 different color-managing browsers. Why is this simple point so hard to grasp? looks like *you* need to reread it, and also read a book or two on colour management. start with real world colour management: http://colorremedies.com/realworldcolor/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
have i managed to buy a camera with two faulty lenses | sean-sheehan | 35mm Photo Equipment | 21 | September 20th 10 05:37 PM |
Monitor calibration and color managed workflow question | Stanislav Meduna | Digital Photography | 23 | December 22nd 05 06:18 PM |
Monitor calibration and color managed workflow question | Stanislav Meduna | Digital SLR Cameras | 17 | December 22nd 05 06:18 PM |
Color Managed Slideshow Program | andre | Digital Photography | 0 | January 30th 05 01:13 AM |
Color Managed Slideshow Program | andre | Digital Photography | 0 | January 30th 05 01:13 AM |