A funny thing's happening to my colour
Discussion
I've only noticed this recently - possibly since I installed XP SP2. I used Adobe Gamma to calibrate the monitor.
I can put a photo in PS CS and tweak it until it looks perfect. But in any other application, or on the web, it looks noticeably paler, less saturated.
It can't be the monitor, so - either something's not right here or the internet needs tweaking... any suggestions please?
I can put a photo in PS CS and tweak it until it looks perfect. But in any other application, or on the web, it looks noticeably paler, less saturated.
It can't be the monitor, so - either something's not right here or the internet needs tweaking... any suggestions please?
Image colour profiles in Photoshop!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
And a few more !!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is an option to set it to prompt whether to load the image's colour profile when you load an image into Photoshop. I always discard the profile, whereas you are loading it by default. I'm not sure if what I do is correct but it means that the image looks the same in all applications.
(Yes, I made the same mistake and it took me weeks to figure it out!)
And a few more !!!!!!!!!!!!!
There is an option to set it to prompt whether to load the image's colour profile when you load an image into Photoshop. I always discard the profile, whereas you are loading it by default. I'm not sure if what I do is correct but it means that the image looks the same in all applications.
(Yes, I made the same mistake and it took me weeks to figure it out!)
Scott Kelby (PS God) reccomends that the first thing you do with PS is change the working colour space from sRGB to Adobe RGB 98. I've also changed it on the camera too. He says that while sRGB is OK for posting on the web, if you're printing/publishing then Adobe is light years ahead. Since switching I've not had the issues you describe, but I used to. HTH.
Martin.
Martin.
GetCarter said:
Discovered yesterday that this was the 'issue' that was causing colour probs with the D2X.
sRGB v Adobe needs a blimmin FAQ!
>> Edited by GetCarter on Tuesday 26th April 15:51
this has to be my biggest single annoyance with the D2X. the screen on the back isnt colour managed, and cannot deal properly with the photos when you select Adobe RGB, they have a horrible green caste and are very undersaturated. this makes it almost impossible to tune the white balance without offloading to a laptop. it is also the reason i have gone back to using sRGB when I started on Adobe. Incidentally, i would love to see a difference in quality on two prints, one taken in each colour space. I know the theoretical benefits but I've never seen them in practice. Has anyone here?
Phil S said:
Have you ticked the box next to Profile Mismatches: Ask when opening? If not do so, reload a file and discard the colour profile. Then when you save it, it should look the same in all applications.
Cheers Phil, I've ticked it. I've seen warnings like that before; maybe the upgrade unsettled it. Anyway, I'll try it like that and see what happens.
It's still odd though as the images are straight from the D70: I just opened one in PS and got no warning.
simpo two said:This is because Photoshop is colour managed, and most other apps (including I.E.) aren't...
I've only noticed this recently - possibly since I installed XP SP2. I used Adobe Gamma to calibrate the monitor.
I can put a photo in PS CS and tweak it until it looks perfect. But in any other application, or on the web, it looks noticeably paler, less saturated.
It can't be the monitor, so - either something's not right here or the internet needs tweaking... any suggestions please?
This means that if your monitor profile is making much of a change from your non-profiled settings, you'll see a difference in images when comparing between PS (which is using the profile) and other apps which aren't.
Unfortunatly, it's something that you just have to live with, and it's not really worth worrying about too much as every other monitor in the world will view the image differently - some very close to what you see in Photoshop, and some not so close.
Thanks Ed - I know you are the king of colour profiling!
I first noticed it while making this page:
www.autograph.uk.com/bloke/social.htm
How do they look to you? They were great when I made them in PS but now seem a bit bleached.
I first noticed it while making this page:
www.autograph.uk.com/bloke/social.htm
How do they look to you? They were great when I made them in PS but now seem a bit bleached.
Bit late on this and probably completely off the mark, but if you capture/work on an image in Adobe RGB, are you not supposed to convert to RGB before exporting as jpg or whatever. By doing this, it reduces the colour gamut to that of RGB but preserves the colours better than if you were to open an Adobe RGB image in an application that doesn't know about such things. 
By chance when I went to open an image in PS today I got the colour profile warning.
There were three options; to use the profile of the image, to use the profile of PS, or neither. So I made three copies and tried each option. The latter gave the warmer tones that looked good in PS but didn't come across in anything else.
I want people to see my photos look the same as I do when I make them. I found that changing the colour profile from sRGB1998 to the monitor profile (IEC-something) seemed to be the best match.
There were three options; to use the profile of the image, to use the profile of PS, or neither. So I made three copies and tried each option. The latter gave the warmer tones that looked good in PS but didn't come across in anything else.
I want people to see my photos look the same as I do when I make them. I found that changing the colour profile from sRGB1998 to the monitor profile (IEC-something) seemed to be the best match.
Gassing Station | Photography & Video | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff