Color Display in Browsers

Growltiger

Administrator
Administrator
Joined
Apr 26, 2008
Messages
12,382
Location
Up in the hills, Gloucestershire, UK
I have been using Firefox since I bought a Dell UP2716D, and it has worked pretty well with the color management. It didn't do so well when opening a browser on my second non wide-gamut monitor. Also it's a slow pig... always wanting to go back to Chrome, so I thought I'd do an update to see if the latest Chrome had improved.... and WOW! 100% ! They've got it totally dialed in now, right out of the box. So if you've abandon Chrome for it's lack of full Color Management support, install the latest version and see what you think!
Perhaps the issue with the second monitor was down to its calibration. Did you have both calibrated? Check the correct profile is set for each in Control Panel/Color Management.

I'm amazed you find Firefox slow. I normally have 25 website tabs open at once and it all works instantly.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,094
Location
New York State
First you must understand that you are not feeding it ProPhoto or even Adobe RGB data because that image data has been converted in the print pipeline to the appropriate paper profile either by PS managing or printer managing colour prior to passing to print.
The fact that you are getting garish/incorrect colour confirms a problem in CM. You have chosen a way around this by using Adobe RGB and this is fine but you have neither resolved or explained the underlying issues within your system.
The resulting colour-rendering when printing from ProPhoto RGB on an Epson with the official Epson Paper Profile is not "Wrong" but it does not replicate what the User sees on his monitor and the resulting garish greens and reds are hideous.

That is because the Epson is printing colours which exist in the gamut of ProPhoto RGB but which are invisible on even the widest-gamut monitors in existence.

Never mind the "Theory": the practicality is that you will get the colours which you are expecting to see in the final print if you convert to the Adobe RGB space before transmitting the file for output on the printer and set the correct Paper Profile for the substrate you are using.

That is the difference between being a Theorist and a Realist with considerable practical experience.
;)
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,889
Location
UK
Really you want to push this? - You clearly do not understand the colour management pipeline and its ramifications in spite of your protestations to the contrary, and your insubstantiated claims about the process do not stand even scant scrutiiny by anyone with a clue about colour management.

It would not normally be a problem except you choosing to harp on about things that are way off the mark and my worry is that someone will waste time on your theories or even worse copy what you are doing and in the process potentially leave IQ on the table

The resulting colour-rendering when printing from ProPhoto RGB on an Epson with the official Epson Paper Profile is not "Wrong" but it does not replicate what the User sees on his monitor and the resulting garish greens and reds are hideous.
You are not printing from ProPhoto RGB, Adobe RGB or any other editing space. Once again these are synthetic spaces not representing any real world device they are just for editing and with a correct ICC profile that is being used by the OS will display your image data as it should be within a colour managed application such as PS or LR. The profile will describe your monitors condition and its ability to meet the targets you set e.g. D65, gamma 2.2. Due to this your colour managed app. will be able to display colour correctly on your monitor even if the monitor is a little blue or yellow from the targets you have set by adjusting the image display to correct.

Now try to understand this - whatever editing space you decide to use your image data will get converted to fit within the paper profile and with a change onscreen to show how it will look in print, providing we have selected the correct profile and this profile is good (THIS IS WHY WE SOFT PROOF) and will be apparent on screen in with colour, contrast and paper white.

You say you are seeing garish greens and hideous reds. The answer once again is dead simple
YOUR COLOUR MANAGEMENT IS NOT.

It could be any of a number of issues and not necessarily just one, some quick examples:
Your monitor profile may be at fault
You may not be applying your monitor profile through the OS
Your paper profile may be at fault
You are not using effective soft proofing and the warning methods for OOG either PS or LR
You are using a third party ink set

That is because the Epson is printing colours which exist in the gamut of ProPhoto RGB but which are invisible on even the widest-gamut monitors in existence.
Congratulations you actually got one part correct. ProPhoto does display some colour which is outside the gamut of all current monitors and even the human eye, but it is the only colour space that is capable of holding the gamut of your DSLR which will certainly exceed even Adobe RGB in certain areas. It is debatable if we will ever see a monitor that can display the full ProPhoto gamut at least those sections that the eye can see.

The nonsense here is you stating that "Epson is printing colours which exist in the gamut of ProPhoto RGB but which are invisible on even the widest-gamut monitors in existence". It is not possible for Epson to print these claimed 'invisible' colours the limit depending on the paper and inkset and the particular printer, but Epson can exceed Adobe RGB in certain areas with specific paper and inkset. You will be able to view and predict where you are OOG with a little experience and the ability to use your software.

See the attached 2d screenplot of Adobe RGB and sRGB and a couple of printing papers one Canon one Epson where these papers and ink exceed the gamut of both these editing spaces is very clear and visible in the real world with prints from image data that falls in this area

Subscribe to see EXIF info for this image (if available)


Never mind the "Theory": the practicality is that you will get the colours which you are expecting to see in the final print if you convert to the Adobe RGB space before transmitting the file for output on the printer and set the correct Paper Profile for the substrate you are using.
Sorry to say but you do not have a clue about this and you really could do with studying the subject before pontificating about it here and coming up with your incorrect theories based on flawed testing

That is the difference between being a Theorist and a Realist with considerable practical experience.
;)
There is no evidence in this post of any real practical experience just your subjective view which has been garnered doing the wrong thing presumably over many years.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,094
Location
New York State
Tony:
Your approach is the unadulterated Theoretical — which is most laudable.

My comments are based on the practical real-life way in which images viewed on a monitor output onto paper and I think that the average user will be happier with their prints if they Convert their files into the Adobe RGB space in Photoshop before outputting their files on an ink-jet printer — and certainly before sending printing jobs to an outside Inkjet Lab..

"Soft-proofing" a wide gamut ProPhoto RGB image on a narrow gamut monitor (which may be narrower than even Adobe RGB) cannot display the full colour-range contained in an ProPhoto RGB image or the range of colours which many inkjets can print.

Soft-proofing was really designed to be a predictor for CMYK Offset Litho printing.
Soft Proofing fails badly when predicting output from multi-ink Inkjets — regardless of how good your substrate Profiles may be.

You have no idea of my background or experience in using Colour Management.

While I may not choose to pen long diatribes on "The Theory of CM" here, I do have many years of experience in dealing with the printing industry (dating back before digital CM had even been invented and going right back to the days of the Letterpress, film separations and plate-engraving).

I have always received excellent colour reproduction of my images from every kind of printing equipment so I reckon that I must be doing something right.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,889
Location
UK
Tony:
Your approach is the unadulterated Theoretical — which is most laudable
Absolute nonsense and I have to say that you are coming across as being intimidated by knowledge that clearly you just do not possess

My comments are based on the practical real-life way in which images viewed on a monitor output onto paper and I think that the average user will be happier with their prints if they Convert their files into the Adobe RGB space in Photoshop before outputting their files on an ink-jet printer — and certainly before sending printing jobs to an outside Inkjet Lab..
Your comments are actually based on, I do not know what but certainly not on any fact or evidence other than your flawed views on how all this works.

Your comment of converting files to Adobe RGB space before outputting to print is virtually criminal and at best laughable demonstrating your lack of knowledge and experience or an experience based on falsehoods.

Once again:
YOU DO NOT convert your files to Adobe RGB before outputting to inkjet and certainly DO NOT convert prior to sending to an outside lab.
Your file image date is converted on the fly to the print colour space (declared in the profile) and it matters not one jot what colour space you start in when it is sent to your printer. The very very last and the most stupid thing to do is to send any lab a print in Adobe RGB unless a lab has asked specifically for this. If you do you deserve what you get. You should (for a decent lab) have an ICC profile supplied for the printer and paper type being used and if they are up to the task of colour managing correctly they will tell you to soft proof within the profile and embedd that profile within your image data.

Some labs may provide an ICC profile but actually ask you to send sRGB - this is a nonsense with only apparent lip service being paid to the concept of colour management and leaving you no clue as to what profile is actually being applied.

Some of those labs use Fuji Frontier which actually has a gamut that exceeds sRGB

I have no idea why you just cannot grasp the concept that you are not sending Adobe RGB, ProPhoto or any other data direct to the printer as all this data has to be converted to fit within the gamut of the printer and inks as defined in the ICC profile for the paper.

"Soft-proofing" a wide gamut ProPhoto RGB image on a narrow gamut monitor (which may be narrower than even Adobe RGB) cannot display the full colour-range contained in an ProPhoto RGB image or the range of colours which many inkjets can print.
WHY are you not getting this?
Soft proofing by its nature is no longer in your editing space be that ProPhoto or any other you choose - IT HAS BEEN CONVERTED TO PAPER SPACE on the fly via the ICC profile and most cases looks very different to your screen image as it is mimicing paper white, contrast etc.

Soft-proofing was really designed to be a predictor for CMYK Offset Litho printing.
Nonsense! Please provide your reference source for this statement.
And if you were serious about this printing it would be via a contract proof.

Soft Proofing fails badly when predicting output from multi-ink Inkjets — regardless of how good your substrate Profiles may be
You absolutely amaze me at the inaccuracy and bad information you are prepared to spout and you are doing yourself no favours by continuing this - unless you actually wish to learn something useful

You have no idea of my background or experience in using Colour Management.
Unfortunately I do and it is rather sad that you have arrived at the conclusions you have
....

You stating "While I may not choose to pen long diatribes on "The Theory of CM" here" does not hide the fact that you cannot as you are out of your depth by a good few feet.

If my comments are perceived as long diatriabes I am actually OK with that and theory actually coincides with reality and not some crackpot theory without factual evidence as you have presented so far.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,094
Location
New York State
Absolute nonsense and I have to say that you are coming across as being intimidated by knowledge that clearly you just do not possess

Your comments are actually based on, I do not know what but certainly not on any fact or evidence other than your flawed views on how all this works.

Your comment of converting files to Adobe RGB space before outputting to print is virtually criminal and at best laughable demonstrating your lack of knowledge and experience or an experience based on falsehoods.

Once again:
YOU DO NOT convert your files to Adobe RGB before outputting to inkjet and certainly DO NOT convert prior to sending to an outside lab.
Your file image date is converted on the fly to the print colour space (declared in the profile) and it matters not one jot what colour space you start in when it is sent to your printer. The very very last and the most stupid thing to do is to send any lab a print in Adobe RGB unless a lab has asked specifically for this. If you do you deserve what you get. You should (for a decent lab) have an ICC profile supplied for the printer and paper type being used and if they are up to the task of colour managing correctly they will tell you to soft proof within the profile and embedd that profile within your image data.

Some labs may provide an ICC profile but actually ask you to send sRGB - this is a nonsense with only apparent lip service being paid to the concept of colour management and leaving you no clue as to what profile is actually being applied.

Some of those labs use Fuji Frontier which actually has a gamut that exceeds sRGB

I have no idea why you just cannot grasp the concept that you are not sending Adobe RGB, ProPhoto or any other data direct to the printer as all this data has to be converted to fit within the gamut of the printer and inks as defined in the ICC profile for the paper.

WHY are you not getting this?
Soft proofing by its nature is no longer in your editing space be that ProPhoto or any other you choose - IT HAS BEEN CONVERTED TO PAPER SPACE on the fly via the ICC profile and most cases looks very different to your screen image as it is mimicing paper white, contrast etc.

Nonsense! Please provide your reference source for this statement.
And if you were serious about this printing it would be via a contract proof.

You absolutely amaze me at the inaccuracy and bad information you are prepared to spout and you are doing yourself no favours by continuing this - unless you actually wish to learn something useful

Unfortunately I do and it is rather sad that you have arrived at the conclusions you have
....

You stating "While I may not choose to pen long diatribes on "The Theory of CM" here" does not hide the fact that you cannot as you are out of your depth by a good few feet.

If my comments are perceived as long diatriabes I am actually OK with that and theory actually coincides with reality and not some crackpot theory without factual evidence as you have presented so far.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,094
Location
New York State
Tony:
I can only wish you continuing happiness basking in your own self esteem.

I will continue to work with the Printing industry and to make my own prints (both Ektacolor and Inkjet) in the same manner in which I have been doing so satisfctorily for the past 60 years.

Other Readers may want to experiment making prints following my suggestions which they may find produces more pleasing results in Reality than they have achieved by putting too much trust in the Theoretical.
 
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
3,889
Location
UK
As I thought someone who actually believes in their own publicity and infallibility.

I truly feel sorry for you being unable to learn and assimilate new concepts to correct the old incorrect ones and I feel I am unable to help any further. So unless you decide to prolong your ordeal I am out of here
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2015
Messages
1,094
Location
New York State
As I thought someone who actually believes in their own publicity and infallibility.

I truly feel sorry for you being unable to learn and assimilate new concepts to correct the old incorrect ones and I feel I am unable to help any further. So unless you decide to prolong your ordeal I am out of here
A very wise decision!
:)
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2017
Messages
14
Location
Cheney, WA
Real Name
Dave Stromberger
Perhaps the issue with the second monitor was down to its calibration. Did you have both calibrated? Check the correct profile is set for each in Control Panel/Color Management.

I'm amazed you find Firefox slow. I normally have 25 website tabs open at once and it all works instantly.
Both monitors were, and are calibrated properly. There may have been something not set-up quite right with my Firefox installation... I do recall seeing it work just fine, on either monitor but that ceased to be the case shortly after. As for Firefox being a slow pig, perhaps I was over-exaggerating... it was fine until a mis-behaving website would run out of control, and I'd have to shut Firefox down and restart. For some reason, Facebook was usually the culprit. But, that isn't the only reason why I am happy to be back with Google Chrome. Always liked Chrome, and it integrates well with the Google ecosystem, of which I am a fanboy. But... as I mentioned, Chrome had a few shortcomings when used on a wide-gamut monitor. But now the latest version has everything dialed in and I couldn't be happier about it! So I thought I'd make a post, in case others have an interest in switching back to Chrome.
 
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
6,455
Location
Annapolis
Thinking about color space gives me a headache so I stopped thinking about it. I know the foundational stuff - a cousin was a printing major and I picked up a bit of knowledge. It's like figuring out quadratics and differential equations - I knew it once, but too many fun things in life are distractions. That said, if there was a home "calibrate all your stuff" service at a reasonable price I would consider paying someone to just do it.
 

Latest posts

Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.
Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.
Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemoji
Copyright © 2005-2019 Amin Forums, LLC
Top Bottom