... or: LR3 shows everything dull and to light...
I've upload an image and described my problem her:
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:
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:
Lightroom 224,52,27 (not that pure)
Irfanview 254,0,0 (~pure red)
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.
Your main monitor is a high-gamut monitor and if you do not use fully (and correctly) colour managed applications then you will not see proper colours. Also, note that the Huey Pro generates V4 ICC profiles and that Firefox 3.6 does not properly display images with V4 profiles. The latest versions of Irfanview (and Fast Picture Viewer) will display images correctly but only if the applications are configured to use the monitor profile.
I just discovered similar problems trying to render a fairly dark, early morning photo. In the JPG's (using either sRGB or Adobe1998) all the shadows went completely to black and the highs looked a little darker. It was not a subtle effect but rather quite obvious. I checked the exported files with a variety of browsers and programs and all display the images darker. (I never had this problem with Lightroom 2.)
Also it seemed - and I need to investigate further - that the exports had much greater noise than the Lightroom view: as if the noise reduction settings had not been fully applied.
For reference, I work with RAW ORF files from an Olympus E-3.
My monitor has been calibrated using a MonacoOptix XR colourimeter.
Hopefully someone from Adobe will read this.
I don't see any such issues when comparing my JPEG exports to the Lightroom ORD rendering. I also work with Olympus ORD files from an Olympus E-3. My wide gamut NEC monitor is (also) calibrated using the Monaco OptixXR colorimeter.
Here's a single screenshot showing: on the left a recent upload from LR 3.0 (sRGB JPEG) as displayed with my Firefox (v3.5.7) browser, and on the right is the ORD rendered in LR 3.0 Library module.
I realize this example can't tell much about relative noise levels (they seem identical to me, however), but it should be evident that both the highlight and shadow areas are about as close as could be expected (IMO).
The external applications lie to you, because they are not color managed.
You cannot do anything about IE and Firefox (at least with v4 ICC profiles that Huey PRO creates), but you can "cure" IrfanView and Chrome:
Make sure you use the lcms.dll plug-in (http://www.irfanview.com/plugins.htm), and enable color-management in Prefs.
Use the "--enable-monitor-profile" command-line parameter to enable color management.
Thanks everybody - I'm still working on this. Trying Dorin and Wolfs advice and testing the results :
I'm getting strange and inconsistent results.
Chrome (with enabled color profiles) looks the best in all the tests on the left, but fails all the tests in the second column. The Adobe and Profoto tests in the first column, look the same, but the colors aren't good - very de-saturated and dull.
Firefox is the other way around, except for the sRGB test in the first column, where it looks good.
My own photos on flickr, looks the same in infanview (with color profile) and in Chrome (with profile) as in lightroom, but still look saturated and dark in firefox (no surprice).
When looking at my flickr photos on other machines the results are inconsistent.
I'll be back..
Still working on this. If I export something, and strip of the color profile (by taking it through irfanViews export to web plugin) it look as it's supposed to, in everything I've thrown at it - except for profile-enabled Chrome and profile-enabled irfanView.
Profile enabled or disabled firefox looks saturated when showing sRGB exports.
Profile enabled chrome looks good when showing sRGB exports.
Profile enabled chrome shows blues as purple when there's no profile
Profile disabled chrome looks saturated when showing sRGB exports.
Flickr sRGB export from lightroom looks good on my laptop with standard chrome and firefox.
It's nearly as if there's a pattern, but I can't quite grasp it.
I think I need to go through Ballards site again.
I'm havign the same problem, use LR 3 and Pantone Huey Pro. When I'm in LR it all looks fine, but when I export everything is way oversaturated and looks fake.
I played with the export options and noticed that if I export using the calibration profile from Huey instead of sRGB the pictures look fine in most places, Irfanview, Firefox etc when I upload to Flickr it looks fine too but then on Facebook they look oversaturated again. I thought that would solve the problem but seems not. Feels like I'm better off not using calibration or there will always be places where the images just look wrong!
I did read it Dorin, a couple of times actually.
I realize that, my point is that there are plenty of non-color managed external viewers out there, including sites like Facebook that seem to convert the files as well (same image looking fine on Flickr buut not Facebook). 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!
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.