colors look different from photoshop to export

Are you using color management? If not, you will need to. What I find to be the best is working in Adobe RGB and then if going to the web,
image> mode> convert to profile and choose sRGB!

From your working space, usually Adobe RGB (1998), convert to sRGB…image> mode> convert to profile> sRGB. It makes a huge difference.

Check out this tip from eyewire
http://www.eyewire.com/tips/mini/displayonline.html

"clavin" wrote in message

I’m guessing this has been discussed before…

Can someone tell me why the colors I see when working in photoshop change slightly (they seem to get a bit brighter) when I export a file for web? Is there some setting somewhere? I’ve used fireworks as well and this

does

not happen. The colors in photoshop’s view seem "truer" and more subdued than what I get upon export.

Here is a visual of what I mean:

http://216.134.221.17/compare.jpg

Yes, it makes a huge difference but what’s going on here?

The book, Real-World Photoshop CS p172ff, goes on in detail to explain that sRGB is a profile developed by MS and HP as a proposed standard for old, 15-inch monitors such as you might pick up at a garage sale. It is awful! It does not conform to the profile used in today’s scanners or printers.

Yet when I load an image either from Elements 2 or from the Nikon 4500 into Photoshop CS, it warns that the file has an embedded sRGB profile and offers to convert it to RBG as it loads. The difference in the two images — one loaded ignoring the warning and one loaded with the conversion — is tremendous. I can’t imagine Adobe using the sRBG profile in Elements 2 nor Nikon using it for the 4500 if all of the above is valid.

So, again, What’s going on here?

.. . . . patrick

"Brad H" <(nospam)> wrote in message

From your working space, usually Adobe RGB (1998), convert to sRGB…image> mode> convert to profile> sRGB. It makes a huge difference.

Where in the hell is this "Display using monitor compensation" setting in photoshop 7? It sure ain’t where these guys say to look. And of course the help has no listing for any such phrase.

Check out this tip from eyewire
http://www.eyewire.com/tips/mini/displayonline.html

"clavin" wrote in message

I’m guessing this has been discussed before…

Can someone tell me why the colors I see when working in photoshop change slightly (they seem to get a bit brighter) when I export a file for web? Is there some setting somewhere? I’ve used fireworks as well and this

does

not happen. The colors in photoshop’s view seem "truer" and more subdued than what I get upon export.

Here is a visual of what I mean:

http://216.134.221.17/compare.jpg

patrick wrote:

Yes, it makes a huge difference but what’s going on here?
The book, Real-World Photoshop CS p172ff, goes on in detail to explain that sRGB is a profile developed by MS and HP as a proposed standard for old, 15-inch monitors such as you might pick up at a garage sale. It is awful! It does not conform to the profile used in today’s scanners or printers.
Yet when I load an image either from Elements 2 or from the Nikon 4500 into Photoshop CS, it warns that the file has an embedded sRGB profile and offers to convert it to RBG as it loads. The difference in the two images — one loaded ignoring the warning and one loaded with the conversion — is tremendous. I can’t imagine Adobe using the sRBG profile in Elements 2 nor Nikon using it for the 4500 if all of the above is valid.
So, again, What’s going on here?

Something is wrong with your settings, or with what you mean with ‘ignoring the warning’. If you convert sRGB to AdobeRGB (or other RGB), you shouldn’t see any difference with keeping the embedded profile. AdobeRGB is a larger color space than sRGB, so it can show any color sRGB can have. If you do see a huge difference, you’re obviously doing something wrong. Perhaps by ‘ignoring’ you mean you check the ‘No color management’ option? In that case the file will be opened in your working space, WITHOUT any conversion. Depending on the working space, that could indeed cause a major color shift. Use ‘Keep embedded profile’.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Thanks for the reply, Johan.

My paraphrasing apparently got me in trouble and I appreciate your help.

When I load an image from either Elements 2 or from the Nikon 4500 into PS CS, I receive the warning message (verbatim):

The document "Chalice 223.jpg" has an embedded color profile that does not match the current RGB workspace.
Embedded: sRGB
Working Adobe: RGB (1998)

I have three radio buttons displayed following the warning (again, verbatim):

How do you want to proceed?
0 Use embedded profile (instead of the working space)
0 Convert the document’s colors to the working space
0 Discard the embedded profile (Don’t color manage)

If I click on the first radio button, the CS menu item, Image/Mode, reports I am working in RGB but I presume this is still the sRGB profile that was embedded in the image. It is this image that is poor.

When I click on the second button, "Convert the document’s colors to the working place," (which I presume to mean the Adobe RGB (1998) profile) the loaded image is much improved. If I now save the file with "Save As" in PS CS and reload it, I get no warning message, which I presume to mean that the sRGB profile was discarded in favor of the Adobe RGB (1998) profile and that the original image did, indeed, have the sRGB profile.

This conforms with the explanation presented in the cited reference but what gives me pause is: Why would both Adobe and Nikon still be using the old sRGB profile? Adobe stopped using sRGB with Version 5 of PS. Or do I still not understand?

At the risk of trying your patience, can you please comment again? Thanks! . . . . patrick

patrick wrote:

[snip]

The book, Real-World Photoshop CS p172ff, goes on in detail to explain

that

sRGB is a profile developed by MS and HP as a proposed standard for

old,

15-inch monitors such as you might pick up at a garage sale. It is

awful! It

does not conform to the profile used in today’s scanners or printers.
Yet when I load an image either from Elements 2 or from the Nikon 4500

into

Photoshop CS, it warns that the file has an embedded sRGB profile and

offers

to convert it to RBG as it loads. The difference in the two images —

one

loaded ignoring the warning and one loaded with the conversion — is tremendous. I can’t imagine Adobe using the sRBG profile in Elements 2

nor

Nikon using it for the 4500 if all of the above is valid.
So, again, What’s going on here?

Something is wrong with your settings, or with what you mean with ‘ignoring the warning’. If you convert sRGB to AdobeRGB (or other RGB), you shouldn’t see any difference with keeping the embedded profile. AdobeRGB is a larger color space than sRGB, so it can show any color sRGB can have. If you do see a huge difference, you’re obviously doing something wrong. Perhaps by ‘ignoring’ you mean you check the ‘No color management’ option? In that case the file will be opened in your working space, WITHOUT any conversion. Depending on the working space, that could indeed cause a major color shift. Use ‘Keep embedded profile’.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

in article zPKVc.1772$
wrote on 8/21/04 9:33 AM:

When I load an image from either Elements 2 or from the Nikon 4500 into PS CS, I receive the warning message (verbatim):

If I click on the first radio button, the CS menu item, Image/Mode, reports I am working in RGB but I presume this is still the sRGB profile that was embedded in the image. It is this image that is poor.

When I click on the second button, "Convert the document’s colors to the working place," (which I presume to mean the Adobe RGB (1998) profile) the loaded image is much improved. If I now save the file with "Save As" in PS CS and reload it, I get no warning message, which I presume to mean that the sRGB profile was discarded in favor of the Adobe RGB (1998) profile and that the original image did, indeed, have the sRGB profile.

This conforms with the explanation presented in the cited reference but what gives me pause is: Why would both Adobe and Nikon still be using the old sRGB profile? Adobe stopped using sRGB with Version 5 of PS. Or do I still not understand?

—
Chances are 100% that your camera is capturing more color data than will be maintained with sRGB.
I would Discard the profile
and Assign a more suitable profile in Photoshop.

MSD

patrick wrote:

Thanks for the reply, Johan.

My paraphrasing apparently got me in trouble and I appreciate your help.
When I load an image from either Elements 2 or from the Nikon 4500 into PS CS, I receive the warning message (verbatim):

The document "Chalice 223.jpg" has an embedded color profile that does not match the current RGB workspace.
Embedded: sRGB
Working Adobe: RGB (1998)

I have three radio buttons displayed following the warning (again, verbatim):

How do you want to proceed?
0 Use embedded profile (instead of the working space)
0 Convert the document’s colors to the working space
0 Discard the embedded profile (Don’t color manage)

If I click on the first radio button, the CS menu item, Image/Mode, reports I am working in RGB but I presume this is still the sRGB profile that was embedded in the image. It is this image that is poor.

That would mean that the profile is poor to begin with. It looks like the embedded profile may not be correct. what happens if you assign (not convert!) AdobeRGB after you opened the image?

When I click on the second button, "Convert the document’s colors to the working place," (which I presume to mean the Adobe RGB (1998) profile) the loaded image is much improved. If I now save the file with "Save As" in PS CS and reload it, I get no warning message, which I presume to mean that the sRGB profile was discarded in favor of the Adobe RGB (1998) profile and that the original image did, indeed, have the sRGB profile.

Yes, this option converts the document to AdobeRGB. However, there shouldn’t be any visible difference with the first option, because AdobeRGB is a wider color space than sRGB. Any color of sRGB can be reproduced in AdobeRGB just as well. It seems to me that the image may be tagged with an sRGB profile, but isn’t really sRGB.

This conforms with the explanation presented in the cited reference but what gives me pause is: Why would both Adobe and Nikon still be using the old sRGB profile? Adobe stopped using sRGB with Version 5 of PS. Or do I still not understand?

You don’t understand. sRGB is not an ‘old’ color space, it’s a color space designed for web images. AdobeRGB on the other hand is used if the image needs to be converted to CMYK later. Both have there own value. Adobe didn’t stop using sRGB: Photoshop has presets for both sRGB (Web preset) and AdobeRGB (printing press presets) working spaces.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

"Johan W. Elzenga" wrote in message

patrick wrote:
Yes, this option converts the document to AdobeRGB.

That’s reassuring. I always select the default middle radio button to convert the embedded sRGB profile to the PS CS Adobe RGB profile when importing files from either Elements or the Nikon 4500. (The Nikon D70 tags its files as Adobe RGB and PS CS loads them with no intercept message.)

However, there
shouldn’t be any visible difference with the first option, because AdobeRGB is a wider color space than sRGB. Any color of sRGB can be reproduced in AdobeRGB just as well.

OK, then I invite you to load any image into PS CS, select Image>Mode>Assign Profile and click between Adobe RGB and sRGB while observing the image. Terrible difference!
Also, try uploading the same image to the web from PS CS, one with the sRGB profile and the other with Adobe RGB (1998) profile.
With all respect, are you suggesting that Adobe Elements 2 and Nikon 4500, in continuing to use the sRGB profile, are presuming that the majority of their users are shooting simply for the lower denominator of web display and have no need for the demonstrably superior capabilities of RGB over sRGB?

You don’t understand. sRGB is not an ‘old’ color space, it’s a color space designed for web images. AdobeRGB on the other hand is used if the image needs to be converted to CMYK later. Both have there own value. Adobe didn’t stop using sRGB: Photoshop has presets for both sRGB (Web preset) and AdobeRGB (printing press presets) working spaces.

It is still my understanding that sRGB is "old" in the sense that it is dated. It is based on the performance of outmoded monitors and does not realize the potential of typical monitors of today. My references state that Adobe stopped using sRGB with version 5. I realize that it is still available as an assigned profile so perhaps the authors meant as the default profile.

Again, the basic question is, why use Adobe RGB as the profile in CS and sRGB in the recently released Elements 2?

I do, indeed, appreciate your patience and possible frustration is replying to what to you must be old and repetitious stuff that confounds the tyro. …..patrick

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

"calvin" wrote in message

Where in the hell is this "Display using monitor compensation" setting in
photoshop 7? It sure ain’t where these guys say to look. And of course
the help has no listing for any such phrase.

—- Forget it, that is an old tip (pre-PS7).

Yes, it makes a huge difference but what’s going on here?
The book, Real-World Photoshop CS p172ff, goes on in detail to explain >that sRGB is a profile developed by MS and HP as a proposed standard >for old, 15-inch monitors such as you might pick up at a garage sale. It >is awful! It does not conform to the profile used in today’s scanners or >printers.

—-Okay, now look on page 173. All answers pertaining to this threads origin can be found here. sRGB is usefull for the web. Some applications such as

Use the working space of your choice. For significant color/gamma correction, convert to or assign a new gamut such as Adobe RGB, ProPhoto RGB, ColorMatch RGB. Use 16 bit if you have the memory and an overall strong computer. Convert back to sRGB when done and ready for the web. Always save a file in it’s original state before conversion. Every conversion has some loss so convert as seldom as possible. Loss is not noticable when you have a good capture. On and on and on…
Oh don’t make me say it. It’s in the manual.p Real World Photoshop CS.

Looking forward to the next chapter. Learning a lot from this type of posting. Thanks for the assist.

regards

Don from Down Under
"patrick" wrote in message

"Johan W. Elzenga" wrote in message

patrick wrote:
Yes, this option converts the document to AdobeRGB.

That’s reassuring. I always select the default middle radio button to convert the embedded sRGB profile to the PS CS Adobe RGB profile when importing files from either Elements or the Nikon 4500. (The Nikon D70

tags

its files as Adobe RGB and PS CS loads them with no intercept message.)

However, there
shouldn’t be any visible difference with the first option, because AdobeRGB is a wider color space than sRGB. Any color of sRGB can be reproduced in AdobeRGB just as well.

OK, then I invite you to load any image into PS CS, select

Image>Mode>Assign

Profile and click between Adobe RGB and sRGB while observing the image. Terrible difference!
Also, try uploading the same image to the web from PS CS, one with the

sRGB

profile and the other with Adobe RGB (1998) profile.
With all respect, are you suggesting that Adobe Elements 2 and Nikon 4500, in continuing to use the sRGB profile, are presuming that the majority of their users are shooting simply for the lower denominator of web display

and

have no need for the demonstrably superior capabilities of RGB over sRGB?

You don’t understand. sRGB is not an ‘old’ color space, it’s a color space designed for web images. AdobeRGB on the other hand is used if the image needs to be converted to CMYK later. Both have there own value. Adobe didn’t stop using sRGB: Photoshop has presets for both sRGB (Web preset) and AdobeRGB (printing press presets) working spaces.

It is still my understanding that sRGB is "old" in the sense that it is dated. It is based on the performance of outmoded monitors and does not realize the potential of typical monitors of today. My references state

that

Adobe stopped using sRGB with version 5. I realize that it is still available as an assigned profile so perhaps the authors meant as the

default

profile.

Again, the basic question is, why use Adobe RGB as the profile in CS and sRGB in the recently released Elements 2?

I do, indeed, appreciate your patience and possible frustration is

replying

to what to you must be old and repetitious stuff that confounds the tyro. ….patrick

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

patrick wrote:

OK, then I invite you to load any image into PS CS, select Image>Mode>Assign Profile and click between Adobe RGB and sRGB while observing the image. Terrible difference!

Of course there is, I’m not saying there isn’t. However, if your image looks terrible to begin with (as you say), that could be exactly the reason: you’re looking at an image that is really AdobeRGB, but somehow got tagged with an sRGB profile. Image>Mode>Assign Profile corrects that. That’s exactly what this menu is for.

Also, try uploading the same image to the web from PS CS, one with the sRGB profile and the other with Adobe RGB (1998) profile.

Why would I? I have already explained to you that sRGB is a web color space and AdobeRGB is a prepress color space. If you upload an image in AdobeRGB, it will look bad on most browsers (except some Macintosh browsers that do use profiles) because browsers ignore the profile and assume the image is sRGB.

With all respect, are you suggesting that Adobe Elements 2 and Nikon 4500, in continuing to use the sRGB profile, are presuming that the majority of their users are shooting simply for the lower denominator of web display and have no need for the demonstrably superior capabilities of RGB over sRGB?

Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. For Photoshop Elements that’s a good assumption, because most digital cameras are sRGB as well, and most inkjet printers can not print the extra colors of AdobeRGB either. Nikon has been criticized for their choice, and they have accepted that criticism: newer scanners are no longer sRGB by default. BTW: If you turn on ‘Full Color Management’ in Adobe Photoshop Elements 2, the default profile becomes AdobeRGB. Photoshop Elements *can* be used in AdobeRGB, it’s just that the default is not.

You don’t understand. sRGB is not an ‘old’ color space, it’s a color space designed for web images. AdobeRGB on the other hand is used if the image needs to be converted to CMYK later. Both have there own value. Adobe didn’t stop using sRGB: Photoshop has presets for both sRGB (Web preset) and AdobeRGB (printing press presets) working spaces.

It is still my understanding that sRGB is "old" in the sense that it is dated. It is based on the performance of outmoded monitors and does not realize the potential of typical monitors of today.

Have it your way. I’m not going into a discussion about whether sRGB should be updated. But it’s the standard "internetRGB", whether you like it or not.

My references state that Adobe stopped using sRGB with version 5. I realize that it is still available as an assigned profile so perhaps the authors meant as the default profile.

Probably, because otherwise it would be plain nonsense. It’s nonsense anyway, because in earlier versions there was no color management in Photoshop, meaning that it always used the default system color space, if I remember correctly. For a Windows PC that might have been sRGB (though I’m pretty sure that sRGB didn’t exist yet at that time), for a Macintosh it was what we now call ‘AppleRGB’.

Again, the basic question is, why use Adobe RGB as the profile in CS and sRGB in the recently released Elements 2?

I’m not Adobe, but I assume because sRGB is a better profile for people who do not really understand color management, use a digital compact camera or a $99 flatbed scanner, and mainly ‘publish’ their images on the web and as inkjet prints. That would be 90% of all people, and 99% of the target audience of Elements. Does that answer the question?

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Guys

I have the capacity to capture in AdobeRGB (Canon 10D). So, should I have my copy of Elements 2 set to "full colour management – optimised for print" (found in the colour management tab), as I print to an I950 using the canon software that comes with the printer.

regards

Don from Down Under

"Johan W. Elzenga" wrote in message

patrick wrote:

OK, then I invite you to load any image into PS CS, select

Image>Mode>Assign

Profile and click between Adobe RGB and sRGB while observing the image. Terrible difference!

Of course there is, I’m not saying there isn’t. However, if your image looks terrible to begin with (as you say), that could be exactly the reason: you’re looking at an image that is really AdobeRGB, but somehow got tagged with an sRGB profile. Image>Mode>Assign Profile corrects that. That’s exactly what this menu is for.

Also, try uploading the same image to the web from PS CS, one with the

sRGB

profile and the other with Adobe RGB (1998) profile.

Why would I? I have already explained to you that sRGB is a web color space and AdobeRGB is a prepress color space. If you upload an image in AdobeRGB, it will look bad on most browsers (except some Macintosh browsers that do use profiles) because browsers ignore the profile and assume the image is sRGB.

With all respect, are you suggesting that Adobe Elements 2 and Nikon

4500,

in continuing to use the sRGB profile, are presuming that the majority

of

their users are shooting simply for the lower denominator of web display

and

have no need for the demonstrably superior capabilities of RGB over

sRGB?

Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. For Photoshop Elements that’s a good assumption, because most digital cameras are sRGB as well, and most inkjet printers can not print the extra colors of AdobeRGB either. Nikon has been criticized for their choice, and they have accepted that criticism: newer scanners are no longer sRGB by default. BTW: If you turn on ‘Full Color Management’ in Adobe Photoshop Elements 2, the default profile becomes AdobeRGB. Photoshop Elements *can* be used in AdobeRGB, it’s just that the default is not.

You don’t understand. sRGB is not an ‘old’ color space, it’s a color space designed for web images. AdobeRGB on the other hand is used if

the

image needs to be converted to CMYK later. Both have there own value. Adobe didn’t stop using sRGB: Photoshop has presets for both sRGB (Web preset) and AdobeRGB (printing press presets) working spaces.

It is still my understanding that sRGB is "old" in the sense that it is dated. It is based on the performance of outmoded monitors and does not realize the potential of typical monitors of today.

Have it your way. I’m not going into a discussion about whether sRGB should be updated. But it’s the standard "internetRGB", whether you like it or not.

My references state that Adobe stopped using sRGB with version 5. I realize that it is still available as an assigned profile so perhaps the authors meant as the default profile.

Probably, because otherwise it would be plain nonsense. It’s nonsense anyway, because in earlier versions there was no color management in Photoshop, meaning that it always used the default system color space, if I remember correctly. For a Windows PC that might have been sRGB (though I’m pretty sure that sRGB didn’t exist yet at that time), for a Macintosh it was what we now call ‘AppleRGB’.

Again, the basic question is, why use Adobe RGB as the profile in CS and sRGB in the recently released Elements 2?

I’m not Adobe, but I assume because sRGB is a better profile for people who do not really understand color management, use a digital compact camera or a $99 flatbed scanner, and mainly ‘publish’ their images on the web and as inkjet prints. That would be 90% of all people, and 99% of the target audience of Elements. Does that answer the question?

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

Sorry, that site is a little outdated. Go to your color settings and choose "web graphics defaults" under the settings dropdown list. Also, make sure you are using websafe colors when creating images for websites.

"calvin" wrote in message

Where in the hell is this "Display using monitor compensation" setting in photoshop 7? It sure ain’t where these guys say to look. And of course the help has no listing for any such phrase.

Check out this tip from eyewire
http://www.eyewire.com/tips/mini/displayonline.html

"clavin" wrote in message

I’m guessing this has been discussed before…

Can someone tell me why the colors I see when working in photoshop

change

slightly (they seem to get a bit brighter) when I export a file for web? Is there some setting somewhere? I’ve used fireworks as well and this

does

not happen. The colors in photoshop’s view seem "truer" and more

subdued

than what I get upon export.

Here is a visual of what I mean:

http://216.134.221.17/compare.jpg

Don wrote:

Guys

I have the capacity to capture in AdobeRGB (Canon 10D). So, should I have my copy of Elements 2 set to "full colour management – optimised for print" (found in the colour management tab), as I print to an I950 using the canon software that comes with the printer.

regards

Don from Down Under

Yes, I would certainly do that.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

I have the capacity to capture in AdobeRGB (Canon 10D). So, should I have my copy of Elements 2 set to "full colour management – optimised for print" (found in the colour management tab), as I print to an I950 using the canon software that comes with the printer.

—
Turn off all that color crap on the camera and capture raw data. Then deal with that in PS.

MSD

On Sun, 22 Aug 2004 11:00:31 +0200, (Johan W.
Elzenga) wrote:

Probably, because otherwise it would be plain nonsense. It’s nonsense anyway, because in earlier versions there was no color management in Photoshop, meaning that it always used the default system color space, if I remember correctly. For a Windows PC that might have been sRGB (though I’m pretty sure that sRGB didn’t exist yet at that time), for a Macintosh it was what we now call ‘AppleRGB’.

And ColorMatch IIRC.

Again, the basic question is, why use Adobe RGB as the profile in CS and sRGB in the recently released Elements 2?

I’m not Adobe, but I assume because sRGB is a better profile for people who do not really understand color management, use a digital compact camera or a $99 flatbed scanner, and mainly ‘publish’ their images on the web and as inkjet prints. That would be 90% of all people, and 99% of the target audience of Elements. Does that answer the question?

And because a lot of modern monitors, despite the OPs original comments, now have an sRGB setting.

—

Hecate – The Real One

veni, vidi, reliqui

Thanks

Don
"Johan W. Elzenga" wrote in message

Don wrote:

Guys

I have the capacity to capture in AdobeRGB (Canon 10D). So, should I

have

my copy of Elements 2 set to "full colour management – optimised for

print"

(found in the colour management tab), as I print to an I950 using the

canon

software that comes with the printer.

regards

Don from Down Under

Yes, I would certainly do that.

—
Johan W. Elzenga johan<<at>>johanfoto.nl Editor / Photographer http://www.johanfoto.nl/

"Char" wrote in message

Sorry, that site is a little outdated. Go to your color settings and choose
"web graphics defaults" under the settings dropdown list. Also, make sure you are using websafe colors when creating images for
websites.

That is IF you need the 256-color, 640×480 setups to see it without a color shift. Many designers and photographers will ignore this limited pallete.