9 Replies Latest reply on Jul 31, 2016 7:43 AM by martinv43908036

    Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB

    martinv43908036

      I've searched the forums but haven't found anything about this.  I would really appreciate the option, in Lightroom, to export files as Untagged RGB.  Are there others out there that would appreciate this?

       

      Martin

        • 1. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
          Simon G E Garrett Level 2

          I don't know any way of doing it in LR, although there are probably utilities to remove the profile from an image.

           

          Out of interest, why do you want untagged files?  To me that's like saying "the temperature is 20, but I'm not going to tell you whether that's degrees F or degrees C".

          • 2. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
            thedigitaldog MVP & Adobe Community Professional

            In a word: NO!

            And untagged image files are bad, very bad! RGB mystery meat. No, I wouldn’t appreciate it and you'll never see it from Adobe.

            You'll have to do this on your own (possible in Photoshop). But you really don't want this!

            • 3. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
              martinv43908036 Level 1

              Thanks Simon and thedigitaldog for your responses.  Most of what I shoot ends up on the web.  I use a fairly good monitor which I calibrate using an X-Rite i1 monitor puck.  I used to prepare files and save them as sRGB.  But after much frustration with having images not appear as I hoped/intended, I came across this set of articles:

               

              STRIPPING EMBEDDING ICC PROFILES in Adobe Save For Web Devices SFW Photoshop Color Management Tutorial

               

              WEB BROWSER COLOR MANAGEMENT Tutorial - Test Page FireFox Safari Chrome Internet Explorer IE 10- FILES have embedded ICC…

               

              For web display, I still prepare files in the sRGB color space, but once done I save them as Untagged RGB files.  After viewing the online results, both on my system/browser and the computers of others, I have much better results getting online images to look close to my intent.  I only do this for images intended for online use.

               

              Regarding never seeing this from Adobe, a quick check of random Adobe websites will show that they save files for online display as Untagged RGB files.  Just right click and image, select the "save as .jpg" option, and then open it up in Photoshop; One will see they're saved as Untagged RGB.  To test, try this page:

               

              Around the Table | Adobe Stock

               

              This can be a subject akin to religion, so I realize there will be a wide range of opinions.  I open to other points of view.

               

              Martin

              • 4. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
                Simon G E Garrett Level 2

                martinv43908036 wrote:

                 

                Thanks Simon and thedigitaldog for your responses. Most of what I shoot ends up on the web. I use a fairly good monitor which I calibrate using an X-Rite i1 monitor puck. I used to prepare files and save them as sRGB. But after much frustration with having images not appear as I hoped/intended, I came across this set of articles:

                 

                STRIPPING EMBEDDING ICC PROFILES in Adobe Save For Web Devices SFW Photoshop Color Management Tutorial

                Regarding this first reference:

                 

                Point 1 is correct - the sRGB profile adds about 4k to the file size.  Not significant for normal images, but might be for thumbnails and small graphics - which normally don't have profiles embedded anyway.

                 

                Point 2 is not correct.  I don't know about Apple - I know it didn't used to assume sRGB but perhaps it does since 10.7.  However it's not true for Windows - any version.  Windows itself does not colour manage, it's the programs and applications that colour manage (or not).  The ONLY Windows browser that assumes untagged are sRGB is Firefox, and even there that's not the default.  It's not true for the Android browsers I've looked at.  I'm afraid it's not correct to say that this (assuming sRGB) "includes at least 95% of people using the Internet today" and it certainly isn't going to work for anyone with wide-gamut monitors.  The idea that "embedded profiles and colour-managed browsers are more for legacy Macs" - no, that's really not true.  It may be relevant for legacy Macs, but that's not the main reason for embedding profiles.

                 

                Point 3 is correct - most people don't use colour management, so at the moment it doesn't matter to them.  However, with the move to 4K/UHD, which uses a wider colour space than sRGB, software makers are going to have to think about colour management, and IMHO it's prudent now to include profiles in order to future-proof.

                 

                Point 4 is partly true, but if I read it correctly it contradicts point 2.  In (2) he says that most devices assume colour is sRGB anyway, and in (4) he's saying no they don't and a mix of tagged and untagged graphics will look a mess.  If (2) were true then this wouldn't apply.  Yes, if someone produces a web site where some of the graphics and images have embedded profiles and some don't then there could be a mismatch on the screen.  The argument is presumably that it's better that the photos show the wrong colour to match the wrong colour of the other graphic elements.  Hmm...  However, on one's own site that's not a problem.  One can ensure that all elements that should match in colour either do or don't have embedded profiles.  It's not a good argument for not embedding profiles.

                 

                Gary has a valid point of view, but not one I share.  With the current mix of colour managed and non-managed, and of various legacy systems, no web page can be guaranteed to show colour correctly on all browsers, and various bodges and kludges might make it better in some situations and worse in others.  However, anything other than embedding profiles is going to make it worse in the long term.  Embedding profiles is without doubt the more future-proof way to go.

                 

                PS - I forgot to mention...

                 

                It's quite true that Photoshop has options to save without embedded profiles.  Photoshop has lots of colour options that are, shall we say, unwise in most circumstances - such as "assign profile", and using Monitor RGB as a working space.  Some of these date back to the very early days of colour management where photographers had to cope with horrendous non-conforming legacy situations, and Adobe has the general policy of not removing old features from Photoshop however dangerous, or they get howls of protest.  I do wish, though, that some of these old features came up with a "deprecated feature" warning when you first try to use them.  It would save new users a deal of grief. 

                • 5. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
                  thedigitaldog MVP & Adobe Community Professional

                  More modern versions of Apple OS assume untagged data is in sRGB, not 'Monitor RGB' anymore thankfully.

                   

                  You really, really want to add that tiny 4K profile because those of us using wide gamut displays and color managed browsers want to see the images properly previewed.

                  • 6. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
                    martinv43908036 Level 1

                    Hi Simon,

                     

                    Thanks for your detailed response.  You bring up some valid points, and the 2 articles I referenced are a bit dated by now.  I, however am left with the real world to deal with.  With respect to images I create, as I view them online on my system AND on other systems, I get the most consistent results, and results closest to my intent, when I work in and save files as Untagged RGB.

                     

                    The following page is from a website of my own.  Each of the images on this page has a red arrow that is embedded in the image.  On many systems the arrows will all have the same color.  On my personal computer using Chrome, not all of the arrows are red.  Some are a more orange color. Red was the intended color.  The images with the red arrows were saved as Untagged, and the others were saved as sRGB:

                     

                    Scenic Utah | 3D Panoramas | 360 Degree Photography | Utah3D.Net

                     

                    Another issue I deal with are the 360 degree panoramas I make.  One of the best programs for rendering images as 360° VR panoramas is KRPano.  It is very widely used.  It strips color profiles when it renders for web.  When I worked in the sRGB color space I used to spend hours preparing source files, viewing the results online, going back to the source file to adjust files again, and doing this repeatedly.  Now I work in Untagged (yes, I know that this is in effect Monitor) color, and what I see in Photoshop is very close to what I see online.

                     

                    A question that still remains is why Adobe would save photo images on their web pages as Untagged RGB.  Here are a few examples:

                     

                    Around the Table | Adobe Stock

                     

                    Digital photography software | Download free Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC trial

                     

                    Save and open any of the photos on these pages and you'll see that they are untagged.  Why would Adobe do that?

                     

                    Let me stress I'm open to whatever the best practice is.  I look forward to anyone's responses to these points.

                     

                    Martin

                    • 7. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
                      Jao vdL Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                      You really do not want to strip the profile for anything. What you're seeing with the color shifts is due to mostly the specifics of your own monitor and in a small part the color management policies of the browser that you're using. This does not apply at all to anybody else. If you see a difference between untagged and sRGB files, it simply means that your monitor is not sRGB and that you are using a browser that does not correctly assume sRGB for untagged images.

                      • 8. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
                        Simon G E Garrett Level 2

                        There are a good many sites that don't embed profiles (and quite a few that remove embedded profiles from submitted images).

                         

                        I have absolutely no idea why Adobe Stock doesn't embed profiles.  Ignorance?  Poor judgement?  Whatever, it makes Adobe Stock completely unusable for anyone with a wide-gamut monitor unless they use Firefox and set option gfx.color_management.mode to 1 (it defaults to 2, which means it doesn't colour managed untagged graphics).

                         

                        The effect of not using embedding profiles means that on most browsers colours are pretty much guaranteed to be inaccurate.  Colours are accurate only on standard-gamut monitors whose colour space is identical to sRGB.  Most standard gamut monitors are close to sRGB, so the error is small.  However, on wide-gamut monitors, unprofiled images such as the Adobe Stock site are over-saturated to positively eye-popping, Ken Rockwell levels.

                         

                        By the way, that site of yours displays correctly in Firefox with gfx.color_management.mode to 1.  AFAIK Firefox is the only PC browser that can do this; IE, Edge, Chrome, Safari, Vivaldi... none of them will colour-managed untagged graphics.  Because some of your red arrows are images with embedded profiles, and some are images or graphics without profiles, as you say they look different on most browsers.  The difference will be small to most users with standard-gamut monitors, but are much greater on wide-gamut monitors.

                         

                        The ideal solution, IMHO, is to make sure that all colour elements that need to match contain profiles, rather than none of them.

                         

                        However, I don't know the circumstances of your site, and your solution might be the best pragmatic choice; I'm giving only a general opinion (note: opinion - I reserve the right to be wrong.)

                         

                        PS - Jao vdL makes a very good point: without embedded profiles throughout, what you see on your monitor won't necessarily be the same as what appears on any other monitor!  Every monitor may be different. 

                        • 9. Re: Exporting from LR as Untagged RGB
                          martinv43908036 Level 1

                          I appreciate this input, and will revisit the entire issue, as it has been some time since in desperation I switched to untagged for web.  Also, it's good to hear your experience with wide gamut monitors; I've stuck with monitors on the higher end of what the general public might have so that I know what they are experiencing.

                           

                          Martin