I hope I can keep this concise, but bear with me if my confusion causes me to include some extraneous info. The info below is what I think is required for someone else to fully understand the issue.
- NECPA271W wide gamut monitor in dual monitor setup with a standard gamut Samsung 245BW
- Windows 8.1 Pro 64-bit
- Nvidia Quadro K4000
- Latest versions of FireFox (v35 32-bit), IE11 (11.0.9600.17498 updated to 11.0.15 32-bit) & Avant (Ultimate 2015 build 7, in use for testing because it incorporates the rendering engines of 3 major browsers, IE v 11.0.9600.17496, FireFox v 34.05.5464, & Chrome v39.0.2172.95)
- i1Display Pro (not the NEC SVSensor version), SpectraView II, NEC Multiprofiler & i1 Profiler
- Both monitors are calibrated and profiled. The NEC is calibrated using SVII, but since that software only supports NEC monitors, the 245BW has to be done using i1Profiler software that comes with the i1Display Pro. SVII is only capable of generating v2 ICC profiles, i1 Profiler is capable of v2 & v4, and recommends v4. Nevertheless, I think this entire bullet point is irrelevant to the effect I'm observing.
- I've lately started selling some of my photography on a fine art website. As a result I started digging deeper into how those images are viewed by others & subsequently printed. Images optimized in sRGB for the best possible display results across a widely varied viewer base are not going to give the same results as images that are soft-proofed and optimized for specific media/printer/ink combinations. This is especially true of my images which tend to lean in the direction of being more heavily saturated & wider gamut
- I've been exhaustively over the info here COLOR MANAGEMENT PHOTOSHOP CC CS6 Basic ColorManagement Theory ICC Profiles Color Spaces Calibrated Monitor Professional… & here http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/ among many others.
I had reached a point where I thought I understood things pretty well, but now I'm not so sure again Here's the problem:
I followed the guidance and info on how to set FireFox for FULL color management (value 1 with associated monitor profile) that allows the handling of non-tagged images and web page elements, http://cameratico.com/guides/firefox-color-management/. Upon restarting Firefox with the updated configuration, I return to the test at http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/ The last two tests there are designed to show a) how much wider your display gamut is than sRGB, and b) how the browser handles untagged images and elements.
The behavior I observe is different from the behavior I expect! Specifically, setting FIrefox to color management value 1 and telling it my monitor profile causes Firefox to display the sRGB tagged images as if they were not tagged. With the default value 2/no monitor profile, I can see a difference between the display of sRGB tagged images and either the ProPhoto RGB tagged image or the untagged sRBG & untagged CSS elements. I would expect that the change to value 1 with monitor profile should have no impact on the display of tagged images and elements, and yet that switch ONLY causes a change in the display behavior of the tagged images it shouldn't have affected, and I can no longer see a difference between the various images because everything is fully saturated
A marked up screen capture showing the comparative behaviors between the various applications and browsers would probably be worth more than the proverbial 1000 words, I'm new here & haven't figured that part out yet, but will post this as is while I work on that.
Can anybody replicate the behavior I observe? Is anybody spotting an error in my thinking?
*EDIT - I have annotated a screen shot comparing the results across 4 browsers. The screenshot has an embedded Adobe RGB profile which best represents the effects & changes that I was/am seeing but may not be preserved if posted here. It may be best to download and view in CS6 so as to not introduce any additional confusion arising from which browser YOU may be using :-) If needed the full res 2560x1440 version is available, but scaling to meet the forum limits of 900x900 makes the text unreadable. Can anyone suggest a means of supplying the full res file with the embedded profile retained?