Yet more color disparity

[Rajah Sulayman]

I sweartagod, color management is gonna give me an aneurysm. Suspecting something was "off" with my display's color reproduction, I did a quick non-scientific test.

First, I re-calibrated my monitor with my x-rite i1.

Then, I opened up Photoshop CS4 and Ultraedit's Color Picker and manually selected full red (ff0000) and saved a screenshot as a PNG.

Then, I opened up the PNG in two browsers -- Firefox, with color profiles enabled via about:config, and Chrome, which does not support color profiles -- as well as in Photoshop, which is supposed to support color profiles.

Looking at the screenshot of all three apps below, two things strike me as curious.

1. If Firefox and Photoshop are supposed to support color profiles but Chrome isn't, why does the color look the same in Photoshop and Chrome, but not Firefox?
2. Why does it look more like red in PS and Chrome, but not FF? Shouldn't it be looking like red in PS and FF, but not Chrome?

What am I doing wrong here?

The screenshot:

[Rajah Sulayman]

The reason I'm stressing over it is because I want to cook up some new graphics for my website and I'm afraid to if Photoshop and Firefox aren't reporting the same colors.

For example, my pages (sample at http://focalmatter.com/portfolio/) use the bgcolor #4E6378. Yet that color looks wildly different in Photoshop and Firefox.

Look at the screenshot below. That's the same color value. #4E6378. I included Photoshop's info box for reference, and if you go to the URL above you can check the code to verify it's using the same hex values. Yet the color representation is incredibly different. And now I'm not sure which one to believe, which makes it impossible to do graphic work with any confidence.

[jdepould]

Are you using sRGB?

[Rajah Sulayman]

...




I was still in ProPhoto.

*facepalm*

[OsmosisStudios]

Hell, try Safari on a Mac. Even with sRGB, it's way off. Ive been told it has something to do with how Safari renders the gamma in graphics.

If you go to my website (link below), you'll likely see a seemless background between the image bit and the flat colour in IE or FF. In Safari, though, there's a clear change. The background is the correct colour, but the image is a full 10% darker.

[lputman]

Maybe it's the color management in firefox. Here's the instructions, just in case, from one of my flickr groups.

By default, Firefox 3.0.6 does not have their color management adjustments enabled. This can cause very odd color tones or even washed out images.

There are multiple ways to resolve this issue but BKBurns provided me with what seems to be the easiest and quickest way I've read so far.

Open a new tab in Firefox, type the following in the address bar:
about:config

A warning box may appear that suggests you might void your warranty... "yeah, right... whatever" Just click the button that says "you'll be careful."

A new bar for filtering will be opened. Type in the word "color" (without the quotes) to help you find the right line to adjust.

On the line "gfx.color_management.enabled" the Value should say "false" and you're going to click on the word to change it to "true."

Close your browser and restart it.

[Rajah Sulayman]

Originally Posted by OsmosisStudios

Hell, try Safari on a Mac. Even with sRGB, it's way off. Ive been told it has something to do with how Safari renders the gamma in graphics.

If you go to my website (link below), you'll likely see a seemless background between the image bit and the flat colour in IE or FF. In Safari, though, there's a clear change. The background is the correct colour, but the image is a full 10% darker.

Eesh. Though IE's pretty crappy with profile management, too. Which doesn't really make all that much sense if you ask me. If IE is tied to the OS, shouldn't it inherit the OS's monitor profiles?

Originally Posted by lputman

Maybe it's the color management in firefox. Here's the instructions, just in case, from one of my flickr groups.

I actually already had profile management turned on in Firefox, which was what was confusing me. It hadn't occurred to me that the issue might be with Photoshop.

[OsmosisStudios]

Originally Posted by rajah sulayman

Eesh. Though IE's pretty crappy with profile management, too. Which doesn't really make all that much sense if you ask me. If IE is tide to the OS, shouldn't it inherit the OS's monitor profiles?

One would think.

The thing with browsers is that theyre being asked to do a fair bit of (albeit simple) work, and theyre being asked to do it the same way, even though theyre all different.

I guess Im off to figure out how to change my CSS by browser... again.

[oxfordy]

Of course, you can take all the care you want calibrating your monitor but, if this is for your pulic website then you have no control over how it will be viewed. Personally, I would leave Firefox be, design your graphics and then use Firefox as a control as to what it might look like on a crap monitor. That way you can avoid designing a colour scheme that only looks good on a perfectly adjusted monitor.

[Rajah Sulayman]

Originally Posted by oxfordy

Of course, you can take all the care you want calibrating your monitor but, if this is for your pulic website then you have no control over how it will be viewed. Personally, I would leave Firefox be, design your graphics and then use Firefox as a control as to what it might look like on a crap monitor. That way you can avoid designing a colour scheme that only looks good on a perfectly adjusted monitor.

It doesn't matter whether or not my audience has a perfectly calibrated monitor. The bottom line is consistency and a level of professionalism. Saying that you shouldn't have to worry about properly-calibrated color because not everyone will be viewing it with a calibrated monitor is like saying you shouldn't have to worry about striving for sharpness in your images because not everyone will be looking at them through 20-20 eyes.