Skip navigation

Tired of color desat when opening in Bridge/Lightroom. HELP!

Oct 27, 2010 7:34 AM

  Latest reply: Gabor-CS, Feb 17, 2014 6:37 AM
Replies 1 2 3 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 18, 2010 7:21 AM   in reply to conniez68

    Hi Connie,

     

     

    Oddly enough, the desaturation only occurred in LR,  and PS. Camera Raw and Bridge we fine.

    Seems Bridges cache was not updated at that moment, but later on and from than you saw the effect on all apps.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 18, 2010 11:22 AM   in reply to ablichter

    Sorry guys, I'm totally stumped.

     

    If there's nothing to distinguish the before or after state, and at the same time the appearance appears incorrect across all color managed apps, and monitor profiling doesn't bring the appearance in the CM'd apps back to a correct looking state, then I can't think of anything left to try to debug without having someone physically looking at your monitor results and trying to knock off all of the different color management variables that could be affecting the system.

     

    The problem you have could still be anywhere and involve one or more components (monitor, graphics card, OS, application, calibration device, calibration software, potentially corrupt profiles, human error).  I'm going to try studying up on the OS color management that's going on with Windows.  From what I've read so far it sounds like WCS could potentially screw up color handling with ICC-based applications since Windows is including some non-standardized features in its color system, but I don't know exactly how the controls work yet and how it interacts with ICC-based CM applications.  It advertises that it should just work and still be compatible with these apps.  Since other forum posts have mentioned this problem, and its only been mentioned by folks that have this particular monitor (right?) I'd investigate the monitor further, too.

     

    Have any of the forum posts you guys have seen mentioned this behavior occurring on Mac?  If you happen to have the links to other forum posts that mention the same problem, would you mind posting them here?

     

    Thanks!  Good luck with the investigation, too!  If I learn anything new I'll let you guys know.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 27, 2010 12:43 PM   in reply to conniez68

    hi, i couldn't follow this thread, but if you want another approach, please go here

    http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/pdi_download/

    and download the ProPhotoRGB test image (it will be in a 15mb .zip)

     

    open the ProPhotoRGB (ppRGB) file in your apps and let me know which apps have the problem

     

    tip:

     

    also drag the ppRGB .jpg icon into your open Web browser windows (in addition to IE, use a color managed Web browser like latest Firefox and/or Apple Safari)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 29, 2010 2:56 PM   in reply to gator soup

    Of course (for anyone following this thread), WHACKED RGB is an even more dramatic tool to troubleshoot this type of problem (I just added a Whacked RGB print resolution file to my above download link):

     

    Tagged with embedded profile WhackedRGB.icc:

     

    WhackedRGB_Tagged.jpg

     

    Exact same file except its embedded profile has been stripped:

     

    WhackedRGB_Untagged.jpg

     

    If you are using a color-managed Web browser the difference between tagged and untagged should be dramatic (very bluish)...if you are using an unmanaged browser, both files will look exactly the same (because they are both having the same default profile applied).

     

    My point is: drop these files into your problem apps and see what's going on...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 30, 2010 2:52 PM   in reply to gator soup

    Yeah, nice play with the cross color space images, but with all respect gator, you should have read the whole thread.

     

    Connie's problem are not non color managed apps, her problem are color managed apps (especially Adobe apps), respectively those who pretend they are.

    Bridge f.e. is not CMed; not in the sense PS is.

     

    For the following test you need to have a wide-gamut monitor with a generic or profiled monitor profile loaded.

    You won't see much of a difference on a non wide-gamut monitor when going through this:

     

    Make yourself a new folder (for example Gator) and put a RAW to it. Open Bridge and develope the RAW as you like. Leave it open in PS. Open MiniBridge and make sure the color management is enabled in its preferences.

    You'll get something similar like this:

    bridge1..jpg

    What you se is a NEF (DSC_4051.NEF) with ACRs "vivid" camera preset assigned, developed to the ProPhoto Colorspace. PS/MB/Bridge.

     

    Now edit the image in PS, resize it to a width with is similar to the width of your monitor. Make it 8 bit or when on CS5 just save it as JPEG. Make sure its name is like that of the full RAW image name, including the suffix (NEF or CR2, etc)  => f.e. imagename.NEF.jpg. For the NEF shown it should be saved as DSC_4051.NEF.JPG

    Find your Bridge cache folder. In there, below \1024, you find a folder which starts with "Gator...." f.e. P:\Bridgecache\1024\GatorCC153054. Copy the saved image to it. Wait a bit or close and restart Bridge, but don't purge cache.

     

    You'll get something like this:

    bridge2..jpg

    What happend? Seems Bridge always assumes that it would be fed with sRGBs. Of course it does so, because an engine (or Bridge itself) in the background interprets the images (NEF, PSD, etc. pp.), means its assigns ACR settings respectively the camera styles, assigning the monitor profile to it and saves all that as a JPEG in sRGB in Bridges cache directory.

     

    IMHO. I might be wrong here regarding the details - so please understand this and the following statement as assumptions...

    Bridge than is reading its cached sRGB and assigns monitor profile again (?) - I can't tell at the moment and have to think about this - but its obvious that something strange is going on here ....

     

    Anyway. Per default there are two cached previews for Bridge, a third will be generated when you switch to full screen preview and zoom in.

    Since we only exchanged the 1024px preview, you will see different previews when switching to full screen or, when f.e. in filmstrip, you minimize the previews until those cached images from the /240 folder are used.

     

    Now assign the monitor profile to the image in PS:

    bridge3..jpg

    Close, but the MB preview still looks different. Not sure if this is visible on every monitor: the MB preview in the middle has a "colder" apperance, compared to what is seen in PS and Bridge.

     

    Now click on the most upper part of the MB window and hold it or move the window a bit and you get this:

    bridge4..jpg

    Now the "warmth" is almost the same on all previews. As soon you lift your finger and release the MB window, it is back to the colder appearance.

     

    So taking all this together, can we tell this is a consistent and reliable color management? So far I believe not - haven't even checked yet, what LR is doing on this...

    What happens to images which previously were processed on a "normal" sRGB and the cache never was rebuild?  And even when the cache was purged after a new monitor come into place and a monitor profile was assigned, what happens to images developed to the ProPhoto color space, but saved without an embedded profile and for a some reason have been tagged as sRGB or aRGB?

    Which can happend, we never know what developers do assign or do forget to remove, right?

     

    I'm talking about the "InteropIndex" here. When this EXIF tag is set f.e. to sRGB or aRGB (no embedded color profile) but the image was developed f.e. to ProPhoto, Bridges metadata view shows that the image is in sRGB and of course it shows it desaturated as well :-(

    bridge5..jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 30, 2010 2:49 PM   in reply to MJOrts

    Hello Mjorts,

    Sorry guys, I'm totally stumped.

    Well if you don't know what's going on, how can we?

    Thanks!  Good luck with the investigation, too!  If I learn anything new I'll let you guys know.

    I believe after reading this and my previous post, you are back to the game and have to report something to other resorts. Or you are telling us, that all this are not bugs but wanted features

     

     

    After reading Connie's last post and about test she did on a MAC, I  did some further tests as well.

     

    AFAIK Connie is on IMac now (@Connie,  correct me, if this is wrong) which I believe is non wide-gamut. Which would mean she's back to the sRGB world and in this tiny world, everything seems to be okay.

    When I understand her last emails right (she might being cut from internet for a while, because she's on a MAC now), she asked her computer technician to reassemble the whole PC, check it and assemble it a again. Hopefully she also asked him to install W7 from scratch as I adviced her, just to eliminate the last possible source.

    Even when I don't believe its an OS/system wide issue anymore.

     

    Because I was able to reproduce what Connie gets with WSC & Adobe on a Dell U2410 wide-gamut monitor, as well on a Samsung non wide-gamut monitor at least for NEFs. Of  course on the latter it is not that obvious, but since the Samsung covers a  color space which is - regarding the reds and yellows - 85% larger than sRGB, a desaturation within reds happens there as well.

    Which is normal when sRGB were processed on a non wide-gamut and viewed on a wide-gamut monitor.

     

    I feel I have to explain why I wasn't able to reproduce the  issue so far: I did my previous tests mostly with Canon CR2, on which  the  difference between ACRs "Adobe Standard" and its "Camera Standard"  profile is not that big like it is with NEFs.

    By this it wasn't obvious to me what happens to Connie and her NEFs.

     

    • Seems ACR applies "Adobe Standard" to the previews in Bridge.

     

    Seems Connie shoot  some or lots of her images with Nikons color styles / presets, f.e. with Mode3 or Vivid. But ACR always applies the Adobe Standard profile - which is the primary  source for the desaturation of NEF files on a wide-gamut monitor when  using ACR.

     

    This might not happen when using the Nikon Capture  NX/NX2, which might automatically recognize the camera styles, but I'm  not sure about that.

     

    bridge1.jpg

     

    This original NEF was shoot with Mode3, the preview in Bridge should  come close to the second image which is the embedded, but untagged JPG.

    I guess Connie (like myself, who as said shoot Canon and Oly) wasn't aware of this circumstances.

     

    • Since ACR provides camera profiles with the latest ACR versions,  why not assigning at least the "Camera Standard" for all cams instead of  assigning something like "Adobe Standard" in Bridge and ACR?

     

    Here's a video recording of that and what I believe Connie encounters (more or less) - compare the camera styles to how the original looks in Bridge:

     

    You might need to watch it on youtube, switch to HD and then fullscreen (the icon to the very right) to see it clear.

     

    I pointed Bridges cache to my slowest disks and the recording software eats  performance as well, so the changes happening by creating the sRGB JPEGs for the  cache, interpretating ACRs color styles and applying the  monitor profile, is very good visible in the recording.

    Which was called as "suddently dropping" colors in the past by Connie.

     

    Note: as long you don't see a small red "star" in the middle of the blue  circle, I'm only pointing to an image, not clicking/selecting it.

     

    Mind the bug at the end: when Bridge is minimized to the taskbar and  is revoked, it shows the cached sRGB image, without loading / applying  the monitor profile. Some need to take action by clicking around or  refreshing the screen, in order to apply the monitor profile. I pointed to the womans hair to show the difference.

    I saw a  thread somewhere in the Adobe Forums (might be the Bridge forum) where  someone was complaing about that as well.

     

    But  all this does not explain why Connie's other images (JPEGs and PSDs) appear desaturated as well.

     

    I believe Connie was used to a sRGB monitor (and/or a workflow set to sRGB) and  when switching, she might have mixed this and that up (converting to, assigning only or saving without a profile) - which is not necessarily her fault.

    Why  f.e. LR per default works in ProPhoto respectively in Melissa space? I myself use to work in ProPhoto, but I'm aware that I work - more or  less blind - on colors my monitor can't display and my printer is not  able to print.

    She also might have converted back and forth between color spaces,  not noticing this and not being aware about the consequences while in a sRGB workflow.  But now - on a wide-gamut monitor - she IMHO gets the bill for that. Unfortunately.

     

    For the following please read my previous post.

    When Bridge was fed by an image with a ProPhoto space via its cache, it shows desaturated previews:

     

    CM.jpg

    Bridge, PS, MB, and in the background the same image in Dopus, an unmanaged FileBrowser.

     

    imatch.jpg

     

    But the same JPEG which was converted to ProPhoto (to the right) and I fed Bridge with, is shown OKAY in IMatch, which is fully color managed.

     

    Why I see it desaturated in Bridge and MB?

     

    The only chance I see for Connie when she wants to stay on W7, with a  wide-gamut monitor and with Adobe products, is to load every single  image as unmanaged to PS and convert it to a profile which gives her the wanted result.

    A bit of a life's work when you have more than ~100.000 images

     

    btw:

    There is another bug with ACR, not sure if its known already:

     

    Set ACR  settings to Camera Raw Database.

    Take a RAW, make copies of it (either  in explorer or by "duplicate" in Bridge) and assign an arbitrary ACR  setting to one. Watch what happens to the other copies in Bridge - you might have to clear cache - or reload Bridge.

    Its settings are applied to all copies of this RAW.

     

    When using XPM sidecars, they (the development settings) are nicely kept seperately.

    ACR should work with the filename, not by reading the asset name or the "original RAW" name from - how I assume - EXIF or XMP.

    I consider this as a serious bug.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 30, 2010 2:57 PM   in reply to ablichter

    This is too much information and too many variables for me to invest in reading through all of this.  I'm sorry.

     

    Why don't you post your Bridge issue in the bridge forum and your ACR issue in the ACR forum and see if someone with more expertise in these areas gets back to you?

     

    For the color management issue, test this with Photoshop, an unmanaged application, and jpegs that include a known/common embedded profile.  This will eliminate any potential issues with ACR and Bridge that could be hiding an underlying color management issue.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Nov 30, 2010 4:59 PM   in reply to ablichter
    you should have read the whole thread.

     

    Fair statement; but I think the phenomenon becomes a bit easier to observe (and articulate) when a user understands the color-management basics (and I didn't read that into the OP).

     

    In any case, the WhackedRGB colorspace unmistakenly jumps out when the profile is ignored or wrongly assumed — this is a very valuable teaching and troubleshooting tool — with Whacked RGB it is evident color management is either working or it is not.

     

    The first thing I would look at is how the suspect app deals with profiles.

     

    Bridge and Photoshop should be displaying the tagged WhackedRGB files properly every time.

     

    Bridge should be displaying the untagged WhackedRGB with the hard blue cast (because Bridge assumes sRGB on untagged files).

     

    Photoshop can display Whacked RGB properly IF the user ASSIGNS WhackedRGB...

     

    I don't know about Lightroom, but it should be obvious with the two WhackedRGB files.

     

    That is where I would have went with this.

     

    If that's not hapening the buggy/corruption theory would be next (if the apps were displaying as expected or is something else is happening).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 2, 2010 1:35 PM   in reply to MJOrts
    This is too much information and too many variables for me to invest in reading through all of this.  I'm sorry.

    No problem.

    It was a hard job to investigate and put that together.

    Why don't you post your Bridge issue in the bridge forum and your ACR  issue in the ACR forum and see if someone with more expertise in these areas gets back to you?

    Me?

    Thanks,  I don't have any issue and I for sure don't start over in another  Forum, just for being asked, if my system is calibrated, if Firefox is  showing the same than Bridge, to load an image with a cross profile, etc. pp.

     

    Personally  I don't even use Bridge, because for a simple image lister which it is  on its best, it eats far to much memory and CPU performance and is unreliable. If i would need to decide about a DAM, than it would be Cumulus anyway.

     

    But I learned some important things for my  company, f.e. that I can't provide Bridge's cache on f.e. a SAN, because color management is applied when cached images are generated.  Which means that the appearance of the cached images not only is  system specific, but specific to certain settings of a  system.

    Even on a single user desktop this means, that the cache have to be purged from time to time, f.e. when changing  monitor profiles or when a monitor needs to be exchanged (which happens more often in a company than in a private household), otherwise I'll  have different appearances in Bridge, MB and PS.

    Another lesson I learned by this was that often (not always) Bridge crashes,  when the monitor profile was changed. Than the cache have to be purged as well.

    I also encountered the ACR Camera RAW database bug and I know how to avoid it, even when I believe xmp files are a pest.

     

    But I  thought at least the latter would be somehow interesting for the Adobe  developement dep. and / or quality management. Even when here is not much knowledge present, about how other parts of the CS suite are working, I believe/hoped communication between this (any) forum and the other deps. should work without  further assistance. If I would be an executive I would demand that  from my employees.

    As a customer who have a real problem (homebreewed or not) like Connie, I would feel dispatched in its bad meaning. "Not my responsibility" please go => somwewhere else. Sorry.

    Should be easy to check if this are (known) bugs or features (I believe Adobe use a bugtracking system like bugzilla or similar) or pointing Bridge Forum mods to this thread simple by an email.

     

    ps

    the last two images in my former post are not shown / were deleted. Just to keep the thread consistent, here they are again:

    CM.jpg

    CM.jpg

     

    imatch.jpg

    imatch.jpg

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 2, 2010 2:02 PM   in reply to gator soup
    The first thing I would look at is how the suspect app deals with profiles.

    Bridge,  PS, LR, Safari, FF does, IE <9 and Chrome does not show the whacked  image (embedded profile) right. As it was to expect. Same with the  untagged image. Just a reminder: you pointed Connie in another forum to Gballards website before.

     

    We did all those tests which can be found around before, and in the Bridge Forum Connie told:

    I had two different adobe support tech's take control of my system for over 2 hrs and neither could understand why or how this was happening since all of the settings, and profiles were set appropriately.

    so at least they considered this as an issue as well or never have seen this kind of desaturation themself before.

     

    Lately I believe there is no "real" problem with Connies computer.

     

    Aside the glitches with Bridges cache, Connie was used to a sRGB system before. F.e. sRGB images processed on a non wide-gamut system look oversaturated on non managed apps and a bit desaturated with managed apps, when viewed on a wide-gamut system. Which is what she gets.

     

    She worked for weeks with this new system, even profiled the monitor.  But I believe she still worked in the sRGB world for those weeks and everything was fine, until - after a reboot - Spyder's LUT loader (or WCS's LUT loader) started to load the calibrated profile.

    At least I found both LUT loader running, when I have been remotely on her system and there was another loader installed: quickgamma.

    Guess Connie installed the latter, because she didn't get any help and tried to solve the issue on her own, reading the hints and tipps in internet, installing other software - and maybe she made it worse by this.

     

    What happend to the images she processed before she rebooted her new system, only can be guessed. She might have had the monitor set to aRGB, but using sRGB in Windows. She sometimes have saved images tagged, but with no embedded profile. She might have assigned or converted back and forth with different profiles in PS respectively by using LR and PS.All by not being aware about the consequences it has when leaving the sRGB world.

     

    Anyway - when listening to reports user provided to us, we never can be sure they were achieved by the same system settings.  Will say, when we ask an user today to check this and that, the results reported back might not fit to those results we got yesterday, because in meantime (compared, to yesterdays configuration) they have been altered by the user and today results are different..

    In other words: we never know what a user have screwed up in meantime ;-) By this our assumptions might be wrong and we might lead the user to do even worse.

    Good example are those three LUT-/gammaloaders: which was active and which profile was loaded when a test was done we asked for? Under which condition images have been posted here?

     

    The only way to be sure is by logging in and checking all settings, respectively set the system back to zero (sRGB etc. pp.) and start over. Even than we can't see the hardware settings, f.e. if the monitor was set to Standard, sRGB or aRGB mode.

     

    But even by doing so (setting her system back to sRGB and than configured it for wide-gamut) I was (and I'm still) surprised, that my images look desaturated on her system as well.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 3, 2010 10:21 AM   in reply to conniez68

    only exhibiting true information in NON-color managed programs


    what monitor profile are you using

     

    to get this info from Photoshop:

     

    Edit> Color Settings> Working Spaces: click on RGB and expand your choices (as in my screenshot)

    then click on Monitor RGB (to highlight it) and take a screen shot (like this):

     

    MonitorRGB.jpg

     

    then post it here

     

    also please post a screen shot of your Color Settings

     

    +++++++

     

    where I am going is that "color only looks bad in color-managed apps" is classic bad monitor profile symptom

     

    classic case study:

    www.gballard.net/windows_srgb/

     

    PS

     

    if you are using a wide gamut monitor, try doing the sRGB test using a standard gamut monitor (because i think the wide gamut monitor is only confusing everyone)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 3, 2010 1:46 PM   in reply to gator soup

    what monitor profile are you using

    where I am going is that "color only looks bad in color-managed apps" is classic bad monitor profile symptom

    Yes, I thought the same. We (in case its not obvious yet - I'm Joerg) tried the generic DELL profile coming with the CD, my calibrated profile, from the same monitor modell just to see if it makes a differences, sRGB, etc. pp. - as Connie told, name it and we tried.

     

    If you would have taken the effort and read Connies older posts (and her last in detail), you would have found out about her former settings, which were fine at that time.The only thing she/we didn't tried so far, is to check on a fresh installed Windows 7 and to exchange the video card.

     

    Sorry when sounding harsh, but I feeel Connie is chased around in a circle right now, leading to nothing.

     

    A word to the Adobe techs which were working remotely on her system: for whatever reason one of them moved the complete 32bit CS5 folder to somewhere else and left it there - Connie what was the location it was moved to?

    Very clever - by this a normal user would have had the next issue soon, when trying to launch CS5 32bit next time. Even when it was meant to make sure he was always testing with the same settings (those of CS 64bit) and not accidentally launching CS5 32bit with different settings - leaving a customer system like this is absolutely unacceptable.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 4, 2010 10:43 AM   in reply to ablichter
    Sorry when sounding harsh

     

    No apology needed for me...but for other people who may stumble across this thread because they, too, are stumped why "color desats" in some of their applications and not others:

     

    The basic theory and troubleshooting are (in most cases) no way as complicated and/or hopeless as presented in this thread.

     

    The OP's most recent statement that only "NON-color managed programs" display color properly points directly to a bad monitor profile (or a basic mix-up of how profiles work).

     

    Getting the profiles in order (with a known good test image) and ruling out a bad monitor profile should take a user less than 15 minutes.

     

    If color-managed apps like Photoshop are still not displaying proper saturation (on known good files) after the profiles are confirmed — it's going to be either how the software is misconfigured, haxied or corrupted, or bad/incompatible hardware.

     

    But agreed, it sounds like a fresh installed Windows 7 and to exchange the video card are decisive steps to rule out the video card and install.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 4, 2010 9:44 PM   in reply to gator soup

    G,

     

    Over the years I learned lo live with the reality that it's futile to try to help users with this particular color management issue.  Their level of frustration is so high that they ultimately become abusive to those trying to help them.  Both you and I have tried numerous times, and only succeed in cases involving an open-minded user genuinely seeking help.

     

    As I've said many times, the more rabid the rant, the greater the probability of PEBKAC.

     

    In this case I've followed the discussion carefully and stayed away because of two factors I would rather not touch with the proverbial ten-foot pole, namely MS Windows and a mediocre Dell wide-gamut monitor.  I would not wish either of those to an enemy.

     

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 4, 2010 10:02 PM   in reply to conniez68

    Connie and Joerg,

     

    You obviously don't know who »Gator Soup« is, and that's understandable.  Allow me to assure you that he is one of the most helpful contributors to the topic of Color Management not just in this forum but in the entire Internet.

     

    More I cannot say because I respect Gator Soup's confidence and because my own user ID simply means Too Old and my signature "I Am Too Old", but your abusive post is totally misplaced.  Sorry.

     

    Connie definitely has a monitor profile problem or the wrong Color Conversion Engine selected, and I'm sorry I can't help you directly because I am not a willing Windows user (though at times I am forced to be one) and have an abysmally low opinion of Dell wide-gamut profiles, particularly the model involved in this discussion.

     

    Connie should enjoy her new Mac tremendously, particularly if she also got an Apple monitor.  Just make sure Photoshop is set to ACE (Adobe Color Engine) and NOT to Apple's color engine, Color Sync.

     

    Finally, I agree with Connie's low opinion of Adobe's customer support.  Adobe is nothing like the corporation it was before becoming the current elephantine bureaucracy it is now, particularly after its Macromediatization.

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 1:16 AM   in reply to conniez68

    Please note EDIT in my last post:

     

    Connie definitely has a monitor profile problem or the wrong Color Conversion Engine selected
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 1:17 AM   in reply to conniez68

    Incidentally, neither Gator Soup nor I work for Adobe.  We have no connection to Adobe either.

     

    These are user to user forums.

     

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 2:28 AM   in reply to conniez68

    let me say it like this

    (assuming your mac is displaying properly and both windows and mac photoshop color settings match)

    USE THE EMBEDDED PROFILE, do not convert

     

    open the full-rez whackedrgb.jpg I linked you to earlier on your mac photoshop monitor

     

    then open it on your windows photoshop monitor

     

    if the windows monitor doesn't match your mac monitor (for all practical purposes): your windows photoshop is using a bad monitor profile

     

    +++++++

     

    if you want a second opinion, simply

     

    on the mac, drag the whacked rgb file into an open safari window

     

    on the windows, do the same thing

     

    and compare

     

    you should see the same results the photoshops are giving you

     

    +++++++

     

    this is not an adobe problem, adobe is only bringing the problem to your attention (like all the other color-managed apps you are using)

     

    why adobe employees can't tell you this outright is a mystery unless they suspect something else is going on and they are investigating it

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 2:53 PM   in reply to Tai Lao
    You obviously don't know who »Gator Soup« is, and that's understandable.  Allow me to assure you that he is one of the most helpful contributors to the topic of Color Management not just in this forum but in the entire Internet.

    It honors you when you show solidarity with G, but hm, I don't care who and what a person "is".  But with respect to GS, no one doubt, that he is a very helpful person and that his intention is to help.

     

    But what I personally find disruptive is that Connie again and again is pointed to websites like Ballard's and which is not the most intuive to read and understand (its the most crappy webdesign I have seen for a while) by someone who didn't read the whole thread and her posts in the other two forums. In the other forum G answered as well -  by - yes, by pointing her to Ballard.

    I'm aware that when I write/talk english I mostly sound harsh, which is not meant likes this. But some comments / help are just tiring to read all the time.

     

    We did a browser check here (with FF CM on) and the 2nd page. All was okay - but what does this  prove? Not much - those are not her PSD or RAW nore is Adobe soft   involved.

     

    As if this whacky image is worlds problem solver :-/   Connie correct me, but you get what you should get when the whacked image was loaded?

     

    She was told to do all that before by Adobe stuff here, than other people and by me; Adobe stuff had two times a look to her system and I checked all that as well - and now she is told to start over again with the same tests.

    Connie definitely has a monitor profile problem or the wrong Color Conversion Engine selected,

    None of this. Not in the sense that the monitor profile is corrupt. Every monitor profile shows this effect, DELL's generic, mine from the same monitor type, WCS is configured to respect ICC profiles and Adobe on ACE, not ICM. The grapiccard is set to "other applications control color settings"

    But I don't know why I repeat all this, we wrote about that before.

     

    She might have a monitor or graphiccard /-driver problem, can't lock that out. She has the latest Nvidia driver - just to lock the next question out ;-)

     

    Note that Connie is on an iMAC now. If I'm not wrong, iMAC has its  own display  which is sRGB only. I'm not sure about that, but if so, its  no wonder  she has her "colors back". Not to forget this is a different  hardware  (graphiccard)

     

    Would you both please give the following statement a bit more weight? It might would be very helpful when revceiving different opinions about that.  I pointed to that in one of my former posts, that I believe the issue is in the images, so far no one commented to this...

    Tried loading the same photos from an external drive to my older system and samsung monitor. Using CS3--The issue followed

    This is what irritates me most. I wasn't able to checked that. One explanation would be the images have been processed wrong, f.e. in ProPhoto, than converted and saved as f.e. sRGB with no embedded profile. But this do not fit to the fact, that they appear oversaturated in non magaged apps.

     

    Connie, are you willing to do another test?

    Set color management in PS to OFF load one of the desaturated image, a PSD (not JPEG yet)

    Say "discard the profile" if CS complains (appears only when "ask when opening" is checked)

    Asssign a large profile, starting by aRGB via ProPhoto and last Wide-Gamut. Let me know which comes closes to what you expect to see, if any.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 4:14 PM   in reply to ablichter
    Connie is on an iMAC now. If I'm not wrong, iMAC has its  own display  which is sRGB only. I'm not sure about that, but if so, its  no wonder  she has her "colors back"

     

    Set color management in PS to OFF load one of the desaturated image, a PSD (not JPEG yet)

    Say "discard the profile" if CS complains (appears only when "ask when opening" is checked)

    Asssign a large profile, starting by aRGB via ProPhoto and last Wide-Gamut. Let me know which comes closes to what you expect to see, if any.

     

    ablichter

     

    I actually read through your latest post several times despite your disrespectful tone (so I could try and understand what on Earth you are talking about).

     

    You are probably a nice person, but you really have your theories mixed up....

     

    Good day (and good luck).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 5:27 PM   in reply to gator soup
    despite your disrespectful tone

    Until now I can't see a disrespectful tone in my latest post, because I don't addressed you in my latest post.

     

    You are probably a nice person

    No, I'm not. Usually I'm a real male ***** @. What you encounter is just the try to be nice. Does not work always.

    @ edited "b i t c h"  is not allowed here

     

     

    Connie is on an iMAC right now and the colors are okay. Is an iMAC sRGB, as I assume or is it or not?

     

    On a different Windows system, with a Samsung monitor (sRGB as I also assume because she didn't tell) with CS3, she has the same desat effect.

     

    So when something is mixed up, it might be by what she reports. But I trust in her here.

     

    My latest statement of course is a theorie, because all that above does not fit to each other.

    What is yours? Loading whacking images around? And when it appears the way it should, what on Earth would your next step, just to know?

    That would be interesting.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 6:37 PM   in reply to ablichter

    Ablichter,

     

    Nahdem ich Ihre Nachrichten sorgfältig gelesen habe, kann ich nur das, was ich vorher geschrieben habe, nochmals wiederholen:

     

     

    Over the years I learned lo live with the reality that it's futile to try to help users with this particular color management issue.  Their level of frustration is so high that they ultimately become abusive to those trying to help them.  Both you and I have tried numerous times, and only succeed in cases involving an open-minded user genuinely seeking help.

     

    As I've said many times, the more rabid the rant, the greater the probability of PEBKAC.

     

    In this case I've followed the discussion carefully and stayed away because of two factors I would rather not touch with the proverbial ten-foot pole, namely MS Windows and a mediocre Dell wide-gamut monitor.  I would not wish either of those to an enemy.

     

     

    Ich bedaure, nicht weiter behilflich sein zu können.

     

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 5, 2010 9:34 PM   in reply to ablichter

    ablichter wrote:

     

    Is an iMAC sRGB, as I assume or is it or not…

     

      iMac displays come in many flavors.  Generally somewhat larger than sRGB.  (BTW, it's Mac not "MAC".)

     

    Dell_v_iMac_display_profiles.jpg

    Typo in the illustration: it should read iMac 27", not 27#.

     

     

    Übrigens finde ich es gemein unanständig von Ihnen, daß Sie gerade hier die Webseite von Herrn Ballard beleidigend kritisieren.

     

    Hat denn Ihne die Möglichkeit gar nicht eingefallen, daß Sie sich in diesem Forum eigentlich mit deren Besitzer unterhalten?

     

    Haben Sie vielleicht Ihre eigene, bessere Webseite anzubieten?

     

     

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2010 10:44 AM   in reply to conniez68

    conniez68 wrote:

     

    Tai Lao wrote:

     

      (BTW, it's Mac not "MAC".)

     


    Wow, really?? Unbelievable.  Grammar professor as well, huh?…

     

     

    No, Ms Smarty Pants.  

     

    It has nothing to do with "grammar"; it's elementary computing terminology:

     

    MAC = Media Access Control

    — In a local area network (LAN) or other network, the MAC (Media Access Control) address is your computer's unique hardware number. (On anEthernet LAN, it's the same as your Ethernet address.) When you're connected to the Internet from your computer (or host as the Internet protocol thinks of it), a correspondence table relates your IP address to your computer's physical (MAC) address on the LAN.

    ( http://searchnetworking.techtarget.com/definition/MAC-address )

     

    Mac = Macintosh

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2010 11:58 AM   in reply to Tai Lao

    Hey, now it seems like it will get real fun here.

     

    MAC are cosmetics 

     

    MAC-addresses are what you pointing to and always said in combination, not just MAC.

    A MAC, a "Media Access Controll" is the control over a/the media, either the TV, radio or DVD player. And in my house in my hands only. AKA remote controll.

    And a Mac is nice design

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2010 2:54 PM   in reply to conniez68

    Hi Connie,

    I told you to try the onboard videocard ;-)

     

    IMHO we can opt the Spyder out - remember we tried different profiles, and with all we had the same effect, even with the generic profile.

     

    We can opt out Spyder' software / LUT loader, because it will try to load the profile which was made default in WSC. But it refuse to load a profile which has no VCGT (video card gamma tag). The generic profile has none, calibrated profile do have that tag. So when loaded the generic profile IMHO Spyders software wasn't distracting here.
    What I for whatever sake never did, is to reset the nVidiA card. I just checked it, but did reset it to factory settings.

    You might give that a try. If this it is, I owe you a dinner

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2010 2:52 PM   in reply to Tai Lao
    Übrigens finde ich es gemein unanständig von Ihnen, daß Sie gerade hier die Webseite von Herrn Ballard beleidigend kritisieren.

    Crappy "google translate" ;-) - gemein unanständig does not exist in german.

    some is "gemein" = cowardly, rude

    or some is unanständig which is morelikly: dirty (I had two showers today - can't be me) indecent or again rude - depends to the context.

    I mean some can be dirty and rude - no question about hat ...

     

    Better would have been "ungemein unanständig" = extremly (...dirty,rude, bitchy etc pp) but even this is not used. In german one of this is absolutely enough to offense one...

    "sehr gemein", "ausgesprochen gemein", "sehr unanständig", "ausgesprochen unanständig"</german lesson>

     

    Even when my english is worth than yours, our both english is not  that bad (i hope), that native english speakers wouldn't understand it.

    If you want to tell me something which is not for the ears of the public, please use PM. But I have to say I'm not keen about talk in the background. Just for the records.

     

    In respect to all others here we should stick to english, so they don't need to go through google translate and get even bader results.

     

    This was not an offensive critique. It was authentic critique, in this case "unknown", but as it seems it was a critique directly pointed to the author of the site.

    A websites content is only as good as it is readable. Dramatically changing font colors and sizes from one paragraph to the other is not good for the eyes nore for the understanding of the content.

    I feel like giving up easily on this - no appetite to browse this site if I didn't urgently need to or forced to so. The content was valuable for me years ago already and new would be so without a doubt, but that's a different ballroom. I talked about the layout.

     

    I didn't insinuate that it was done for creating page impressions only. Not yet. But any linking helps to go up in googles ranking, right?

    No problem - I do that in Flickr, I do with my screenshots in here. Any of my screenshot in here is a link to my webserver, but not to one of my websites which counts in a ranking (on all three I don't have advertisers, if this is of interest)

    Hat denn Ihne die Möglichkeit gar nicht eingefallen, daß Sie sich in diesem Forum eigentlich mit deren Besitzer unterhalten?

    Yes, it came to my mind that the owner of the website could be "Gator Soup" the first time I saw "Gator" pointing to it. But I discarded the idea because I might would have expect more of the author of this site in here and in any other forum.

    Is it allowed to say I'm even more disappointed now? Without getting bashed for it?  I believe it is.

    If this is information is right. I just listen to rumors and react to it. Maybe I shouldn't.

     

    Disappointment is not only a matter of expectation some have just out of the blue, but often a matter of impressions and hope some one or things/cirmustances stir up.

    Wuah - I wonder if that is to understand...

    Haben Sie vielleicht Ihre eigene, bessere Webseite anzubieten?

    You can say "Du" to me ;-) With the formal "Sie" I really felling old. I mean real old. This might offend me.

     

    No, I don't have to offer an own or even better website - at least none with text content.

    Come one. Critics don't have to make things they criticize on their own and better. We have critiques about PS and Bridge, MS and MACs (except seperatists, they only have critiques about things they don't know about, don't run, own, use and feelings they don't feel) does this mean we have to code our own software?

     

    There are sites which offer blogs and layouts which are easy of use.  There is software which creates nicely formated html code  within a click and which can be uses on personal website on own  webserver free of charge .

    I just wished I ever would have expressed this before direct on his website, if there is the chance to do, not sure. Haven't been there for a while. But its never to late, right?

     

    Anyway. Users in here shoud relax a bit, don't take themself to serious and shouldn't take this as it is a million dollar business.

    But I partially understand Connie's reaction - she feels totally left alone by Adobe and maybe judged as an idiot by some in here.

     

    And now please let us stop talking about others. I would rather like to be in a dialog with others (as long I'm not being told check "this" and go "there" all the time) than in dialogs about them.

    Thanks.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 6, 2010 11:19 PM   in reply to ablichter

    Ablichter, Sie spinnen wohl!

     

    ablichter wrote:

     

    Übrigens finde ich es gemein unanständig von Ihnen, daß Sie gerade hier die Webseite von Herrn Ballard beleidigend kritisieren.

    …gemein unanständig does not exist in german…

     

    Dabei habe ich lediglich das Bindewort (auck Konjuktion genannt) »und« aus Versehen weggelassen.  Übrigens finde ich es gemein und unanständig von Ihnen…

     

    Haben Sie denn gar keine Schande?

     

    ablichter wrote:

     

    Even when my english is worth than yours, our both english is not  that bad (i hope),

     

    Erstens meinen Sie »worse« (schlechter), nicht »worth« (Wert).  Zweitens komme ich mit Ihrer eigenartigen Anwendung der englischen Sprache nicht ganz zurecht.  Um ganz ehrlich zu sein, fast alles, was Sie auf Englisch schreiben, ist ein kaum verständliches Kauderwelsch.  Das war hauptsächlich der Grund, warum auch Andere Ihre Aussagen nicht verstanden haben.

     

    »…our both english is…»  ??? 

     

    ablichter wrote:

     

    …they don't need to go through google translate and get even bader results.

     

    »bader«???  Vermutlich meinen Sie schon wieder »worse«.

     

     

     

    ablichter wrote:

     

    No, I don't have to offer an own or even better website - at least none with text content.

     

     

    On that note, I'm happy to end this exchange.  

     

     

     

    ____________

    Wo Tai Lao Le

    我太老了

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 12, 2010 5:13 PM   in reply to conniez68

    Connie,

     

    Interesting problem.  I'm sorry you've had so much trouble.  I also have a Spyder 2 Pro that I used on a Dell 2405FPW, a couple years ago under Windows XP and recently under Windows 7.  I also use Photoshop and Bridge (often using the Adobe RGB color space) but didn't experience any problems such as yours.

     

    I recently got a wide gamut Dell U3011 and hooked it up before uninstalling or trying to disable the Spyder's profile change that occurs every time Windows is booted.  I had gone to TFT Central and installed the Adobe RGB profile they created for a Dell U3011, and on the next boot the Spyder software spit out an error message about the profile having too much information.  (I have since uninstalled the Spyder software.)

     

    Perhaps that doesn't tell you much, but if it turns out that your issue is related to the Spyder calibration, the video card, an incompatibility between the video card and the Spyder software, with Windows and the Spyder, etc., or some other non Photoshop problem, you owe Adobe a big apology.

     

    Please update us all when you have more info.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2011 12:02 AM   in reply to conniez68

    I am having the same problem.  Everything was fine until I upgraded to a wide gamut monitor today (Dell U2711).  Just to add to Connie's comments, I have a ATI video card, so this is not Nvidia specific.  Also, this is not isolated to Adobe products.  Using IrfanView, I can duplicate the colour shift/desaturation by unchecking the "enable color management" box.

     

    test.jpg

     

    Left is unmanaged, and right is managed.  They're two rendering of the same file by Irfan with color managed check and uncheck.

     

    When Bridge is open, thumbnails appear as they do in the left image, then within 2 seconds change to how they appear in the right image.

     

    Any ideas?  Or is this just how a wide gamut monitor intreprets the colour?  Some of the pix looks quite green ... thanks.

     

    Edited:  Did more testing.  Firefox looks the same as Bridge (CS4) as in greener and less saturated, while IE8 looked more yellow and saturated.  This is definitely not Adobe specific, but has more to do with managed/unmanaged color profile.  Strangely, on my old monitors (Viewsonic VP2130 and Dell 2407), IE8 and Bridge/IrfanView didn't show a noticible difference.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2011 7:54 AM   in reply to Johnnysks76

    If you are going to use a wide-gamut monitor, you will need to embed ICC profiles and use software that reads embedded profiles.

     

    If that doesn't fix the problem, I would recommend starting a new thread (and avoiding this thread altogether).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2011 9:15 AM   in reply to gator soup

    I have been embedding color profile for many years, and using them in colour profile applications as well.  The only reason I didn't start a new thread is to help the next person who may have found Connie's post.  In my case, upgrade from the SpyderPro 2 to Spyder3 Express solve the problem partially as supposenly SpyderPro 2 may not read a wide gamut display correctly.  Now across different applications (even IE8, which does not support sRGB) the colour are consistent, however they still look washed out compare to the same setup with a non wide gamut monitor.  I'll chuck this up to wide gamut display and call it a day.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2011 9:22 AM   in reply to Johnnysks76

    I first suggest ignoring "gator soup" and continuing your comparison of monitors, and add in some different settings in Bridge. Of course everyone should always be using color management and ALL programs (Perhaps things like Notepad are exceptions, but not anything that displays graphics.) should be capable of color managing, but your experiments between limited monitors and your new wide gamut montior could be quite valuable, and this may be the the right thread.  (If you're turning off color management only to try and duplicate the color shift in Adobe Bridge you see that may be valid.  Gator soup appears to assume you don't know that turning off color management will change the colors you see on a wide gamut monitor.)

     

    I have a Dell U3011 and can see the color shifting behavior in the thumbnails in Bridge as well as the full size preview in Bridge, but I don't think this is happening for me on pure jpegs.  I have found a couple of different ways to see the colors shifting in .CR2 files from a Canon 7D.  One is to change the option for thumbnail and preview generation near the upper right of the Bridge window.  It's in the lower toolbar just above the main preview window when you are in "ESSENTIALS" view.  (It's still there in the other views in the same general location.)  When I toggle from using the embeded image to generating a high quality preview, the thumbnails will go from dull to oversaturated.  The large preview appears to be about right in some cases and thus does not match the thumbnail.  In some cases though I'm seeing colors that are dull.

     

    The other way to see the changes is by changing the camera raw defaults, and then reverting back to them.  In my case both issues I'm talking about are Adobe specific.  To be relevant to Connie's original issue, and to what I'm trying to work on, I think you will need to be looking at the differences in the Adobe software.  I think there may be an issue which is unknown to Connie and others or at least not fully understood, and/or there could an unintended "feature" in Adobe's color management that is causing problems.

     

    I look forward to your feedback based on changing preview settings and perhaps other settings in Bridge and comparing the differences on your limited gamut montiors vs. your new Dell wide gamut.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2011 9:26 AM   in reply to Chris_BC_1

    Hi Chris.  I know of the "Colour shift" when thumbnails are displayed in Bridge when Bridge first opens.  Since upgrading to Spyder3 Express, I no longer experience the colour shift.  Colour in EVERYTHING from CS4 Bridge/PS, IrfanView (with color manage on and reading sRGB profiles), FF, IE8, or even the desktop wall paper is very consistent now, but washed out (a bit).  I suppose this implies I'll have to reedit my portfolio work, as the future IE9 and current FF does support sRGB and will be the norm going forward.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 22, 2011 9:35 AM   in reply to Johnnysks76

    Hi Chris

     

    I suspect the spyder3 express profiling puts the default window colour for unprofile application very close to sRGB.  I ran one last test for you, using Irfanview with colour management turned on and off (representing sRGB and no colour management).

     

    test2.jpg

    If I had to nitpick, yeah, it is not perfect, but pretty damn close, and good enough for my needs.  I hope that helps.

     
    |
    Mark as:
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points