Ok, so I finally compared my images online on 2 different internet browsers side by side…safari and firefox…what a difference ! My images in ps are identical to what i see in safari, but many of my images look completely different, colour wise, in firefox. I set my colour policies to north american 2, adobe rgb in ps and convert to profile / save as srgb (1966) prior to uploading to the web… Has anyone else experienced this? What am I doing wrong and what can i do to correct it so that i know that people viewing my images, regardless of the browser they are using, will see an accurate colour rendition of the images? thanks!
The only color managed browser these days appears to be Safari Βother than the now defunct Internet Exploder for the Mac.
All other browsers, including Internet Exploder for Windows will assume the image is indeed in sRGB (or a very similar, nebulous "monitor" profile) and will distort the colors accordingly if they are in any color space other than sRGB.
just an update..Its beeen suggested by a very reliable individual that the best way to ensure that colours are realistically reproduced on all browsers (all other things being equal withthe monitor set ups) is to first save the file as srgb (1966) and then "save for web" which strips the colour profile and lets the browser & monitor display the colours ..and the colours should be pretty darn close… any commments ?
Your friend is wise. sRGB is a common standard. Make sure you ‘convert’ to srgb and don’t ‘assign’ sRGB. I don’t know about ‘realistically’ though, there are too many variables in displays and browsers but srgb seems to be lingua franca or lowest common denominator!
Your friend is telling you the same thing we’ve been telling yow since post #1: convert to sRGB.
If you want to retain Metadata, you should consider doing a Save As instead of Save for Web. Save for Web strips all Metadata, that’s why you have to add it afterwards. π
update …again.. well I posted some images online after "saving for web" and the skin tones are very flat compared to my regul;ar srgb image… should i be editing in ps again after "saving for web" to compinsate for the marginal 256 colours (ie add red ) ?
…the skin tones are very flat compared to my regul;ar srgb image… should i be editing in ps again after "saving for web" to compinsate for the marginal 256 colours…
Are you saving photos of people as GIFs?? Not a good idea.
….so I my next question would be.. 1…why not "save to web" people..under what conditions would save to web be advantagious? 2..for those who shoot weddinds for instance (mostly people shots), do you save to web or just post the srgb image onto the web? 3…sounds like..too me..that "saving to web" is not the best choice for image quality..maybe going back to just saving in srgb(1966) would be the best (??).
SFW doesn’t change image quality. It just stops the profile being embedded.
If your monitor is set up as described earlier, and you make a photo look good on your own screen, it will look ‘good’ to others because their eyes will be tuned to their screen….its a relative concept, relative to their viewing conditions, you have to make it look ‘correct’ amongst all content as seen by a random viewer.
One day when all monitors are self calibrating and all applications are colour managed, you will embed a profile and your photos will look good anywhere. (in a dream world!)
"Save For Web" does not automatically mean saving as a GIF. GIFs are terrible for photos of people, or for photos in general, but more so for people photos.
When saving for web, you can specify the format. Select JPEG.
And I inferred (maybe incorrectly) from the mention of 256 colors (maximum for GIF images) along with a color change (which would not happen if the OP followed all other advice… AND saved as JPEG) that the Jordan might have been saving as GIF.
Since most web applications are not colour managed, your best option is to convert to; and save as; srgb, since that is the acknowledged default standard for unmanaged applications and photos.
Save for Web has options to convert to other formats, but they will not give the best result.
Save for Web also ‘strips’ the colour profile, which is not required if the image is only intended to view in non-‘colour managed’ situations. This reduces the file size.
Saving as jpeg with high quality setting will achieve a reasonable degree of compression with minimal loss of quality.
If your own (monitor and colour) setup is good and you correctly convert to srgb and save to jpg, you will present the images as well as can be expected in an imperfect medium.
Doing this will not fix a bad photo and may make a good photo look worse, but coming up with an acceptable initial skintone while adjusting the images in photoshop in srgb should result in reasonable result.
So in the end, the images that you create will probably have no other use but the web presentation you created them for…and people will see the images differently, there is no cure for that, yet!
You left out the format (presumably JPEG) in this paragraph:
Since most web applications are not colour managed, your best option is to convert to; and save as; srgb, since that is the acknowledged default standard for unmanaged applications and photos.
Unless you get a chance to edit it, it will make Jordan’s head come off. π
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
