Yeah maybe they solved it. I am Beta-Tester since 2008 (guess it was Adjust V2.6 at that time) and it just happend here and then with certain plug-ins or better said: with certain computers and their OS installations. As said this is to avoid by creating a link to the Topaz Folder since PS jumps in there, parses the folder and will find any plug-in in there. Anyway. ... View more

Hi, in general only one link to the for Topaz-Installation Folder is needed which covers Topaz Plug-ins. Make a link for "C:\Program Files (x86)\Topaz Labs" (when on 64 bit) or "C:\Program Files\Topaz Labs" and copy it to your plug-in folder. Whatever Topaz Plug-in will be installed in future and regardless if it writes its own lnk to the right place, you will "see" it in PS. regards, Jörg ... View more

I looked at the calibration of the monitor, but i know it’s not the monitor because the image looks fine in “windows picture viewer” application. Anyway, tell us which OS you use and what monitor profile is configured for the OS If I minimize bridge and then maximize, the image will look correctly saturated, but when I click my mouse, or move the window, it returns to being desaturated and has a color shift. This sounds like smaller previews where create with the correct colorprofile, while larger are not - either before or after a change must happend. What happens when you delete Bridges cache? Same same, or did it help (they all look okay) or are the smaller previews desaturated as well then? Jörg ... View more

Conny, well, even when it works for you (in other words: gets your colors back to what you expect or how you like them to appear), I'm pretty sure your current settings make not much sense. You work with sRGB profiles, but the monitor is in aRGB mode. You believe you disabled Windows Color Management, but what you disabled is something different: "The WcsPlugInService service hosts third-party Windows Color System color device model and gamut map model plug-in modules. These plug-in modules are vendor-specific extensions to the Windows Color System baseline color device and gamut map models. Stopping or disabling the WcsPlugInService service will disable this extensibility feature, and the Windows Color System will use its baseline model processing rather than the vendor's desired processing. This might result in inaccurate color rendering." This service normaly stands on "manuall", and is used/started by third party modules only, IMHO. I also wonder, if it makes sense, to fall back to the internal graphic card and sRGB when using a wide gamut monitor. Guess the internal card is not OpenGl capable? ... View more

Übrigens finde ich es gemein unanständig von Ihnen, daß Sie gerade hier die Webseite von Herrn Ballard beleidigend kritisieren. Crappy "google translate" 😉 - gemein unanständig does not exist in german. some is "gemein" = cowardly, rude or some is unanständig which is morelikly: dirty (I had two showers today - can't be me) indecent or again rude - depends to the context. I mean some can be dirty and rude - no question about hat ... Better would have been "ungemein unanständig" = extremly (...dirty,rude, bitchy etc pp) but even this is not used. In german one of this is absolutely enough to offense one... "sehr gemein", "ausgesprochen gemein", "sehr unanständig", "ausgesprochen unanständig"</german lesson> Even when my english is worth than yours, our both english is not  that bad (i hope), that native english speakers wouldn't understand it. If you want to tell me something which is not for the ears of the public, please use PM. But I have to say I'm not keen about talk in the background. Just for the records. In respect to all others here we should stick to english, so they don't need to go through google translate and get even bader results. This was not an offensive critique. It was authentic critique, in this case "unknown", but as it seems it was a critique directly pointed to the author of the site. A websites content is only as good as it is readable. Dramatically changing font colors and sizes from one paragraph to the other is not good for the eyes nore for the understanding of the content. I feel like giving up easily on this - no appetite to browse this site if I didn't urgently need to or forced to so. The content was valuable for me years ago already and new would be so without a doubt, but that's a different ballroom. I talked about the layout. I didn't insinuate that it was done for creating page impressions only. Not yet. But any linking helps to go up in googles ranking, right? No problem - I do that in Flickr, I do with my screenshots in here. Any of my screenshot in here is a link to my webserver, but not to one of my websites which counts in a ranking (on all three I don't have advertisers, if this is of interest) Hat denn Ihne die Möglichkeit gar nicht eingefallen, daß Sie sich in diesem Forum eigentlich mit deren Besitzer unterhalten? Yes, it came to my mind that the owner of the website could be "Gator Soup" the first time I saw "Gator" pointing to it. But I discarded the idea because I might would have expect more of the author of this site in here and in any other forum. Is it allowed to say I'm even more disappointed now? Without getting bashed for it?  I believe it is. If this is information is right. I just listen to rumors and react to it. Maybe I shouldn't. Disappointment is not only a matter of expectation some have just out of the blue, but often a matter of impressions and hope some one or things/cirmustances stir up. Wuah - I wonder if that is to understand... Haben Sie vielleicht Ihre eigene, bessere Webseite anzubieten? You can say "Du" to me 😉 With the formal "Sie" I really felling old. I mean real old. This might offend me. No, I don't have to offer an own or even better website - at least none with text content. Come one. Critics don't have to make things they criticize on their own and better. We have critiques about PS and Bridge, MS and MACs (except seperatists, they only have critiques about things they don't know about, don't run, own, use and feelings they don't feel) does this mean we have to code our own software? There are sites which offer blogs and layouts which are easy of use.  There is software which creates nicely formated html code  within a click and which can be uses on personal website on own  webserver free of charge . I just wished I ever would have expressed this before direct on his website, if there is the chance to do, not sure. Haven't been there for a while. But its never to late, right? Anyway. Users in here shoud relax a bit, don't take themself to serious and shouldn't take this as it is a million dollar business. But I partially understand Connie's reaction - she feels totally left alone by Adobe and maybe judged as an idiot by some in here. And now please let us stop talking about others. I would rather like to be in a dialog with others (as long I'm not being told check "this" and go "there" all the time) than in dialogs about them. Thanks. ... View more

Hi Connie, I told you to try the onboard videocard 😉 IMHO we can opt the Spyder out - remember we tried different profiles, and with all we had the same effect, even with the generic profile. We can opt out Spyder' software / LUT loader, because it will try to load the profile which was made default in WSC. But it refuse to load a profile which has no VCGT (video card gamma tag). The generic profile has none, calibrated profile do have that tag. So when loaded the generic profile IMHO Spyders software wasn't distracting here. What I for whatever sake never did, is to reset the nVidiA card. I just checked it, but did reset it to factory settings. You might give that a try. If this it is, I owe you a dinner ... View more

Hey, now it seems like it will get real fun here. MAC are cosmetics  MAC-addresses are what you pointing to and always said in combination, not just MAC. A MAC, a "Media Access Controll" is the control over a/the media, either the TV, radio or DVD player. And in my house in my hands only. AKA remote controll. And a Mac is nice design ... View more

despite your disrespectful tone Until now I can't see a disrespectful tone in my latest post, because I don't addressed you in my latest post. You are probably a nice person No, I'm not. Usually I'm a real male bitch @. What you encounter is just the try to be nice. Does not work always. @ edited "b i t c h"  is not allowed here Connie is on an iMAC right now and the colors are okay. Is an iMAC sRGB, as I assume or is it or not? On a different Windows system, with a Samsung monitor (sRGB as I also assume because she didn't tell) with CS3, she has the same desat effect. So when something is mixed up, it might be by what she reports. But I trust in her here. My latest statement of course is a theorie, because all that above does not fit to each other. What is yours? Loading whacking images around? And when it appears the way it should, what on Earth would your next step, just to know? That would be interesting. ... View more

You obviously don't know who »Gator Soup« is, and that's understandable.  Allow me to assure you that he is one of the most helpful contributors to the topic of Color Management not just in this forum but in the entire Internet. It honors you when you show solidarity with G, but hm, I don't care who and what a person "is".  But with respect to GS, no one doubt, that he is a very helpful person and that his intention is to help. But what I personally find disruptive is that Connie again and again is pointed to websites like Ballard's and which is not the most intuive to read and understand (its the most crappy webdesign I have seen for a while) by someone who didn't read the whole thread and her posts in the other two forums. In the other forum G answered as well -  by - yes, by pointing her to Ballard. I'm aware that when I write/talk english I mostly sound harsh, which is not meant likes this. But some comments / help are just tiring to read all the time. We did a browser check here (with FF CM on) and the 2nd page. All was okay - but what does this  prove? Not much - those are not her PSD or RAW nore is Adobe soft   involved. As if this whacky image is worlds problem solver 😕   Connie correct me, but you get what you should get when the whacked image was loaded? She was told to do all that before by Adobe stuff here, than other people and by me; Adobe stuff had two times a look to her system and I checked all that as well - and now she is told to start over again with the same tests. Connie definitely has a monitor profile problem or the wrong Color Conversion Engine selected, None of this. Not in the sense that the monitor profile is corrupt. Every monitor profile shows this effect, DELL's generic, mine from the same monitor type, WCS is configured to respect ICC profiles and Adobe on ACE, not ICM. The grapiccard is set to "other applications control color settings" But I don't know why I repeat all this, we wrote about that before. She might have a monitor or graphiccard /-driver problem, can't lock that out. She has the latest Nvidia driver - just to lock the next question out 😉 Note that Connie is on an iMAC now. If I'm not wrong, iMAC has its  own display  which is sRGB only. I'm not sure about that, but if so, its  no wonder  she has her "colors back". Not to forget this is a different  hardware  (graphiccard) Would you both please give the following statement a bit more weight? It might would be very helpful when revceiving different opinions about that.  I pointed to that in one of my former posts, that I believe the issue is in the images, so far no one commented to this... Tried loading the same photos from an external drive to my older system and samsung monitor. Using CS3--The issue followed This is what irritates me most. I wasn't able to checked that. One explanation would be the images have been processed wrong, f.e. in ProPhoto, than converted and saved as f.e. sRGB with no embedded profile. But this do not fit to the fact, that they appear oversaturated in non magaged apps. Connie, are you willing to do another test? Set color management in PS to OFF load one of the desaturated image, a PSD (not JPEG yet) Say "discard the profile" if CS complains (appears only when "ask when opening" is checked) Asssign a large profile, starting by aRGB via ProPhoto and last Wide-Gamut. Let me know which comes closes to what you expect to see, if any. ... View more

what monitor profile are you using where I am going is that "color only looks bad in color-managed apps" is classic bad monitor profile symptom Yes, I thought the same. We (in case its not obvious yet - I'm Joerg) tried the generic DELL profile coming with the CD, my calibrated profile, from the same monitor modell just to see if it makes a differences, sRGB, etc. pp. - as Connie told, name it and we tried. If you would have taken the effort and read Connies older posts (and her last in detail), you would have found out about her former settings, which were fine at that time.The only thing she/we didn't tried so far, is to check on a fresh installed Windows 7 and to exchange the video card. Sorry when sounding harsh, but I feeel Connie is chased around in a circle right now, leading to nothing. A word to the Adobe techs which were working remotely on her system: for whatever reason one of them moved the complete 32bit CS5 folder to somewhere else and left it there - Connie what was the location it was moved to? Very clever - by this a normal user would have had the next issue soon, when trying to launch CS5 32bit next time. Even when it was meant to make sure he was always testing with the same settings (those of CS 64bit) and not accidentally launching CS5 32bit with different settings - leaving a customer system like this is absolutely unacceptable. ... View more

The first thing I would look at is how the suspect app deals with profiles. Bridge,  PS, LR, Safari, FF does, IE <9 and Chrome does not show the whacked  image (embedded profile) right. As it was to expect. Same with the  untagged image. Just a reminder: you pointed Connie in another forum to Gballards website before. We did all those tests which can be found around before, and in the Bridge Forum Connie told: I had two different adobe support tech's take control of my system for over 2 hrs and neither could understand why or how this was happening since all of the settings, and profiles were set appropriately. so at least they considered this as an issue as well or never have seen this kind of desaturation themself before. Lately I believe there is no "real" problem with Connies computer. Aside the glitches with Bridges cache, Connie was used to a sRGB system before. F.e. sRGB images processed on a non wide-gamut system look oversaturated on non managed apps and a bit desaturated with managed apps, when viewed on a wide-gamut system. Which is what she gets. She worked for weeks with this new system, even profiled the monitor.  But I believe she still worked in the sRGB world for those weeks and everything was fine, until - after a reboot - Spyder's LUT loader (or WCS's LUT loader) started to load the calibrated profile. At least I found both LUT loader running, when I have been remotely on her system and there was another loader installed: quickgamma. Guess Connie installed the latter, because she didn't get any help and tried to solve the issue on her own, reading the hints and tipps in internet, installing other software - and maybe she made it worse by this. What happend to the images she processed before she rebooted her new system, only can be guessed. She might have had the monitor set to aRGB, but using sRGB in Windows. She sometimes have saved images tagged, but with no embedded profile. She might have assigned or converted back and forth with different profiles in PS respectively by using LR and PS.All by not being aware about the consequences it has when leaving the sRGB world. Anyway - when listening to reports user provided to us, we never can be sure they were achieved by the same system settings.  Will say, when we ask an user today to check this and that, the results reported back might not fit to those results we got yesterday, because in meantime (compared, to yesterdays configuration) they have been altered by the user and today results are different.. In other words: we never know what a user have screwed up in meantime 😉 By this our assumptions might be wrong and we might lead the user to do even worse. Good example are those three LUT-/gammaloaders: which was active and which profile was loaded when a test was done we asked for? Under which condition images have been posted here? The only way to be sure is by logging in and checking all settings, respectively set the system back to zero (sRGB etc. pp.) and start over. Even than we can't see the hardware settings, f.e. if the monitor was set to Standard, sRGB or aRGB mode. But even by doing so (setting her system back to sRGB and than configured it for wide-gamut) I was (and I'm still) surprised, that my images look desaturated on her system as well. ... View more

This is too much information and too many variables for me to invest in reading through all of this.  I'm sorry. No problem. It was a hard job to investigate and put that together. Why don't you post your Bridge issue in the bridge forum and your ACR  issue in the ACR forum and see if someone with more expertise in these areas gets back to you? Me? Thanks,  I don't have any issue and I for sure don't start over in another  Forum, just for being asked, if my system is calibrated, if Firefox is  showing the same than Bridge, to load an image with a cross profile, etc. pp. Personally  I don't even use Bridge, because for a simple image lister which it is  on its best, it eats far to much memory and CPU performance and is unreliable. If i would need to decide about a DAM, than it would be Cumulus anyway. But I learned some important things for my  company, f.e. that I can't provide Bridge's cache on f.e. a SAN, because color management is applied when cached images are generated.  Which means that the appearance of the cached images not only is  system specific, but specific to certain settings of a  system. Even on a single user desktop this means, that the cache have to be purged from time to time, f.e. when changing  monitor profiles or when a monitor needs to be exchanged (which happens more often in a company than in a private household), otherwise I'll  have different appearances in Bridge, MB and PS. Another lesson I learned by this was that often (not always) Bridge crashes,  when the monitor profile was changed. Than the cache have to be purged as well. I also encountered the ACR Camera RAW database bug and I know how to avoid it, even when I believe xmp files are a pest. But I  thought at least the latter would be somehow interesting for the Adobe  developement dep. and / or quality management. Even when here is not much knowledge present, about how other parts of the CS suite are working, I believe/hoped communication between this (any) forum and the other deps. should work without  further assistance. If I would be an executive I would demand that  from my employees. As a customer who have a real problem (homebreewed or not) like Connie, I would feel dispatched in its bad meaning. "Not my responsibility" please go => somwewhere else. Sorry. Should be easy to check if this are (known) bugs or features (I believe Adobe use a bugtracking system like bugzilla or similar) or pointing Bridge Forum mods to this thread simple by an email. ps the last two images in my former post are not shown / were deleted. Just to keep the thread consistent, here they are again: CM.jpg imatch.jpg ... View more

Hello Mjorts, Sorry guys, I'm totally stumped. Well if you don't know what's going on, how can we? Thanks!  Good luck with the investigation, too!  If I learn anything new I'll let you guys know. I believe after reading this and my previous post, you are back to the game and have to report something to other resorts. Or you are telling us, that all this are not bugs but wanted features After reading Connie's last post and about test she did on a MAC, I  did some further tests as well. AFAIK Connie is on IMac now (@Connie,  correct me, if this is wrong) which I believe is non wide-gamut. Which would mean she's back to the sRGB world and in this tiny world, everything seems to be okay. When I understand her last emails right (she might being cut from internet for a while, because she's on a MAC now), she asked her computer technician to reassemble the whole PC, check it and assemble it a again. Hopefully she also asked him to install W7 from scratch as I adviced her, just to eliminate the last possible source. Even when I don't believe its an OS/system wide issue anymore. Because I was able to reproduce what Connie gets with WSC & Adobe on a Dell U2410 wide-gamut monitor, as well on a Samsung non wide-gamut monitor at least for NEFs. Of  course on the latter it is not that obvious, but since the Samsung covers a  color space which is - regarding the reds and yellows - 85% larger than sRGB, a desaturation within reds happens there as well. Which is normal when sRGB were processed on a non wide-gamut and viewed on a wide-gamut monitor. I feel I have to explain why I wasn't able to reproduce the  issue so far: I did my previous tests mostly with Canon CR2, on which  the  difference between ACRs "Adobe Standard" and its "Camera Standard"  profile is not that big like it is with NEFs. By this it wasn't obvious to me what happens to Connie and her NEFs. Seems ACR applies "Adobe Standard" to the previews in Bridge. Seems Connie shoot  some or lots of her images with Nikons color styles / presets, f.e. with Mode3 or Vivid. But ACR always applies the Adobe Standard profile - which is the primary  source for the desaturation of NEF files on a wide-gamut monitor when  using ACR. This might not happen when using the Nikon Capture  NX/NX2, which might automatically recognize the camera styles, but I'm  not sure about that. This original NEF was shoot with Mode3, the preview in Bridge should  come close to the second image which is the embedded, but untagged JPG. I guess Connie (like myself, who as said shoot Canon and Oly) wasn't aware of this circumstances. Since ACR provides camera profiles with the latest ACR versions,  why not assigning at least the "Camera Standard" for all cams instead of  assigning something like "Adobe Standard" in Bridge and ACR? Here's a video recording of that and what I believe Connie encounters (more or less) - compare the camera styles to how the original looks in Bridge: You might need to watch it on youtube, switch to HD and then fullscreen (the icon to the very right) to see it clear. I pointed Bridges cache to my slowest disks and the recording software eats  performance as well, so the changes happening by creating the sRGB JPEGs for the  cache, interpretating ACRs color styles and applying the  monitor profile, is very good visible in the recording. Which was called as "suddently dropping" colors in the past by Connie. Note: as long you don't see a small red "star" in the middle of the blue  circle, I'm only pointing to an image, not clicking/selecting it. Mind the bug at the end: when Bridge is minimized to the taskbar and  is revoked, it shows the cached sRGB image, without loading / applying  the monitor profile. Some need to take action by clicking around or  refreshing the screen, in order to apply the monitor profile. I pointed to the womans hair to show the difference. I saw a  thread somewhere in the Adobe Forums (might be the Bridge forum) where  someone was complaing about that as well. But  all this does not explain why Connie's other images (JPEGs and PSDs) appear desaturated as well. I believe Connie was used to a sRGB monitor (and/or a workflow set to sRGB) and  when switching, she might have mixed this and that up (converting to, assigning only or saving without a profile) - which is not necessarily her fault. Why  f.e. LR per default works in ProPhoto respectively in Melissa space? I myself use to work in ProPhoto, but I'm aware that I work - more or  less blind - on colors my monitor can't display and my printer is not  able to print. She also might have converted back and forth between color spaces,  not noticing this and not being aware about the consequences while in a sRGB workflow.  But now - on a wide-gamut monitor - she IMHO gets the bill for that. Unfortunately. For the following please read my previous post. When Bridge was fed by an image with a ProPhoto space via its cache, it shows desaturated previews: Bridge, PS, MB, and in the background the same image in Dopus, an unmanaged FileBrowser. But the same JPEG which was converted to ProPhoto (to the right) and I fed Bridge with, is shown OKAY in IMatch, which is fully color managed. Why I see it desaturated in Bridge and MB? The only chance I see for Connie when she wants to stay on W7, with a  wide-gamut monitor and with Adobe products, is to load every single  image as unmanaged to PS and convert it to a profile which gives her the wanted result. A bit of a life's work when you have more than ~100.000 images btw: There is another bug with ACR, not sure if its known already: Set ACR  settings to Camera Raw Database. Take a RAW, make copies of it (either  in explorer or by "duplicate" in Bridge) and assign an arbitrary ACR  setting to one. Watch what happens to the other copies in Bridge - you might have to clear cache - or reload Bridge. Its settings are applied to all copies of this RAW. When using XPM sidecars, they (the development settings) are nicely kept seperately. ACR should work with the filename, not by reading the asset name or the "original RAW" name from - how I assume - EXIF or XMP. I consider this as a serious bug. ... View more

Yeah, nice play with the cross color space images, but with all respect gator, you should have read the whole thread. Connie's problem are not non color managed apps, her problem are color managed apps (especially Adobe apps), respectively those who pretend they are. Bridge f.e. is not CMed; not in the sense PS is. For the following test you need to have a wide-gamut monitor with a generic or profiled monitor profile loaded. You won't see much of a difference on a non wide-gamut monitor when going through this: Make yourself a new folder (for example Gator) and put a RAW to it. Open Bridge and develope the RAW as you like. Leave it open in PS. Open MiniBridge and make sure the color management is enabled in its preferences. You'll get something similar like this: What you se is a NEF (DSC_4051.NEF) with ACRs "vivid" camera preset assigned, developed to the ProPhoto Colorspace. PS/MB/Bridge. Now edit the image in PS, resize it to a width with is similar to the width of your monitor. Make it 8 bit or when on CS5 just save it as JPEG. Make sure its name is like that of the full RAW image name, including the suffix (NEF or CR2, etc)  => f.e. imagename.NEF.jpg. For the NEF shown it should be saved as DSC_4051.NEF.JPG Find your Bridge cache folder. In there, below \1024, you find a folder which starts with "Gator...." f.e. P:\Bridgecache\1024\GatorCC153054. Copy the saved image to it. Wait a bit or close and restart Bridge, but don't purge cache. You'll get something like this: What happend? Seems Bridge always assumes that it would be fed with sRGBs. Of course it does so, because an engine (or Bridge itself) in the background interprets the images (NEF, PSD, etc. pp.), means its assigns ACR settings respectively the camera styles, assigning the monitor profile to it and saves all that as a JPEG in sRGB in Bridges cache directory. IMHO. I might be wrong here regarding the details - so please understand this and the following statement as assumptions... Bridge than is reading its cached sRGB and assigns monitor profile again (?) - I can't tell at the moment and have to think about this - but its obvious that something strange is going on here .... Anyway. Per default there are two cached previews for Bridge, a third will be generated when you switch to full screen preview and zoom in. Since we only exchanged the 1024px preview, you will see different previews when switching to full screen or, when f.e. in filmstrip, you minimize the previews until those cached images from the /240 folder are used. Now assign the monitor profile to the image in PS: Close, but the MB preview still looks different. Not sure if this is visible on every monitor: the MB preview in the middle has a "colder" apperance, compared to what is seen in PS and Bridge. Now click on the most upper part of the MB window and hold it or move the window a bit and you get this: Now the "warmth" is almost the same on all previews. As soon you lift your finger and release the MB window, it is back to the colder appearance. So taking all this together, can we tell this is a consistent and reliable color management? So far I believe not - haven't even checked yet, what LR is doing on this... What happens to images which previously were processed on a "normal" sRGB and the cache never was rebuild?  And even when the cache was purged after a new monitor come into place and a monitor profile was assigned, what happens to images developed to the ProPhoto color space, but saved without an embedded profile and for a some reason have been tagged as sRGB or aRGB? Which can happend, we never know what developers do assign or do forget to remove, right? I'm talking about the "InteropIndex" here. When this EXIF tag is set f.e. to sRGB or aRGB (no embedded color profile) but the image was developed f.e. to ProPhoto, Bridges metadata view shows that the image is in sRGB and of course it shows it desaturated as well 😞 ... View more

Hi Connie, Oddly enough, the desaturation only occurred in LR,  and PS. Camera Raw and Bridge we fine. Seems Bridges cache was not updated at that moment, but later on and from than you saw the effect on all apps. ... View more

Hi, even when Connie answers some points already, let my add some more. Whether Bridge or PS, its the same on both. I made sure the seetings are okay, so no sideeffects can happend here. So when I mentioned Bridge than because it was used for a quick view to the images. And I purged its cache when important things in the system were changed. Connie uses CS5, ACR 6.2, Bridge 4.0.3. 9 - as said all the latest, because we updated. My setup is a bit different since I use ACR and DNG Converter 6.3 beta, but this does not matter here. Profile was the default,  which comes with the CD and systems "viewing conditions profile" is "WCS  profile for ICC viewing conditions" as it should be, when you don't use  MS's internal CM. MS's internal CM and "WCS profile for  sRGB viewing conditions" refers to the *.cdmp file "in  C:\Windows\System32\spool\drivers\color" which f.e. appears as "sRGB  virtual device model profile" in the WCS dialog. Connie  uses IE 8 - FF I didn't checked, but as told in another post, I  need to corrected the CM settings to 1 (gfx.color_management.mode) for enabling CM for any rendered image and it  behaves as it should. I use colormanaged IE9 beta and FF 3.6.12 with the same settings. We verified settings and browsers viewing conditions with this site, especially the 2nd page. Her IE still is Color Stupid (explained at the 3rd page) FF "Color smart" 😉 But the webbrowsers are IMHO not the point here. Does the U2410 have different "modes" that you can set in the monitor menu, and then assign the corresponding manufacturer provided profile in Windows color management?  I tried this with my HP Dreamcolor, setting its mode manually to sRGB, and then changing the monitor profile WCM to match it as sRGB, and then the colors on all applications match (IE8, FF, Safari, and Photoshop).  Could you try something like that? Yes, the monitor has, thought hers was set to aRGB, but it seems its on  Standard. But except with sRGB this settings just changes the color temperature -  aRGB usually is  warmer. This doesn't proof a thing, because the color of the images matches in both browsers and explorer 😉 There was a bit difference  maybe, because IE doesn't read the embedded profile and FF makes use of rendering intents. The prob  appears, when a colormanged app comes into game. (I forgot to point FF to the monitor profile, I used sRGB instead :-(, but the above test was passed) I won't say its with Adobe products, but of course we concentrated to them. @Connie Not sure if I saw Fastpicture viewer or if it was another product on  your computer the other day. Can you please download it from here and set it to use the Dells generic monitor profile in Menu =>  Options. Please check if the images are desaturated in there as well and report. Should  be, because its CMed. My theory is that the desaturated colors are the "right" colors, and that the monitor just displays a wider gamut with much more saturated colors than the color spaces typically embedded in images (sRGB, aRGB). Like Connie I have to disagree too. Images looked okay before booting. And right before Bridge applies its color corrections to them, they look okay too. Regarding this: Since you have the same monitor though, it sounds like this might not explain it, but just comparing screenshots I don't think will answer the problem since screenshots in Windows are untagged (if they're just capturing the raw color numbers coming out of the monitor, then a  screenshot passed between one U2410 to another could still look different from each other, and it wouldn't prove that the  Bridge/Photoshop colors are wrong).  Or, if you paste a screenshot into a blank, new document sRGB image in Photoshop, the image inside of the color managed app will appear desaturated and the image in non-managed app will appear normal Let me resume: My aRGB embedded image looked  desaturated with her Bridge or Photoshop. I was able to see that even in a remote  session. I took a screenshot by what I saw on my computer. I viewed my image in Bridge on my computer and took a screenshot. I opened both in CS5, converted them to sRGB - appearances stayed the same. I pasted them into one image, saved that as embedded sRGB and uploaded it here. Note that I compared two screenshots and not a screenshot with the my original image... if they're just capturing the raw color numbers coming out of the monitor Yepp, but what was captured is the already interpreted/processed data, poiting to the color numbers of the monitor(s) - will say  we captured the endproduct = what is shown to the user. I believe its acceptable to compare this way. Correct me if my idea is wrong, but please explain it a bit more indeep. Of course I can't say if Connie saw the same like me, since I was on a remote session, but I believe she would have intervened or corrected me, when what I presented looked to different to what she saw. In my former post there was a mistake ( will correct that after sending this, not sure if I can mark it noticeable as edited because striking often does not work when editing an already posted reply ). Seems I'm not able to correct a former post anymore, after there was a reply. I said the image in question had sRGB embedded, but it has aRGB and looked desaturated on her PS/Bridge. sRGB are almost fine. Her system is performing diametral to how it should. Let me again take the old example: its like viewing an aRGB or ProPhoto image with <IE8. What I don't know: is there a need for a gamut-mapping when images colorspace is the same as the working and monitor space? Or does it always happend? @all - thanks for your help, but please don't concentrate to much to an Adobe update. As Connie reported in one of her former posts, she has this with other CM apps too, not only PS, LR or Bridge. btw: Does somebody know, why there is a © in front of the filename and colorspace for the image I mentioned in the other thread? I can do what I want, I can't get rid of it and I also don't find something poiting to © in EXIF, IPTC or XMP. ... View more

Even though your test results so far are a little confusing, I still believe this is expected behavior, where your wide gamut monitor is just oversaturating images that look normal under color managed applications.  I own a wide gamut monitor and can reproduce the effect you're getting by opening an aRGB tagged image in IE8 and seeing that its far more saturated than the same image opened in Firefox, Safari, or Photoshop since they can read and respect the embedded profile without sending the color numbers straight to the monitor. Since I work in a company doing a lot DTP (we do yellow pages for some cities in germany) I have a business related interest in that and I had a remote session with Connie some hours ago. How does it fit to you, when even a sRGB made on my computer, with an embedded sRGB profile, sent over to her computer,  looks desaturated in Bridge on her monitor, but as it should be in IE and FF? A sRGB might should loook slighty different in Bridge, but not at all desaturated. Its like watching an image with a large colorspace by a small monitor profile or assigning sRGB to an image in ProPhoto. Or similar to what we see with an unmanaged browser (IE <V9) in the web, when the images are in aRGB or ProPhoto. The DELL monitor profile coming with the CD was loaded. You won't believe it, when haven't seen. I'm a bit lost here, since the issue appears to her after a reboot, so I don't expect a hardware failure. I also don't believe its a Adobe bug (I must have it as well with my U2410), but something else interfering... To one of her PSD this was assigned, and Bridge showed it as untagged: Mind the © in front - filename on disk: dsc_4400cz-89.psd ps was very late yesterday, so here're the screenshots to the left how the image looks on her monitor in Bridge with the default DELL U2410 profile, to the right the same image as it should look, in my Bridge (embedded sRGB) Camera RAW preferences were set to "apply autotone adjustments" unchecked and "disable JPEG support", so it was not influenced by this. ... View more

Hi, I thought this box only gets checked on if you "calibrate" your monitor by eye using Windows' own calibration wizard utility? AFAIR in several publications in the net (which means nothing), its Windows 7 new/own LUT loader. Its a system wide configuration and you can disable it by going to Advanced => Change system defaults => Advanced. ROFL. Disabeling it means you are not able to change / load ANY profile anymore with WCM/this dialog. Even when I tried today without a collision on my system, I wonder what happens when there are two or three (Spyder's or Eye-One, the old Adobe Gamma Loader and Windows LUT-Loader) are active on a system. ... View more

Hi Connie, Let me resume: Non  colormanaged applications (like windows explorer) shows your images  right, managed apps like LR and Bridge, which have different  cache folders, shows them desaturated, even the previewed NEF. Putting this  together, it can't a problem with the cache, harddisk, CF card. I mean, a  cache is a cache, and might needed to be updated from time to time, f.e.  when changing the monitor- or image profile. But I expect you always have done this. That's it - most of the rest (the tests done) provides unreliable information, sorry. I'm aware that to most of them you were forced by others, so don't take my following statements to personal. Nevertheless I believe what we see partitial is right: some of your images  are untagged (at least the PSD we see in one of the screenshots in here) Untagged images should look the same  in IE and Firefox unless you set Gfx.color management.mode to 1 and assign the monitor profile to FF. Per default CM in FF is enabled for tagged images only and by this acts like IE <V9 on untagged images Untagged sRGB should look oversaturated on wide-gamut monitors and browsers on which you can't apply a profile. Believe that is what you get. You asked me I'm confused which photos you viewed of mine that you found to be untagged? all the images you presented in threads in here are untagged 😉 Some might think different about that, but IMHO images always should have an embedded profile, even sRGB JPEGs used for web. You already get some hints on that in the other thread and the links to Ballard - even when his webdesign is a bit odd, its worth reading. I believe your issue is a combination of untagged images, a faulty monitor profile and maybe false handling. As implied above, personaly I can't trust any of the tests here, because they are (including the browser test I mentioned) not consistant done - I will tell you why. What you see next are three of the images you provided here, but stacked: #1 (RGB/8*)* here the second * indicates, that the image was altered (either bei assigning a colorspace or bei normal editing) after it was loaded and in a colorspace which is different from Photoshops working colorspace, which is indicated by the first * #2 (RGB/8*) indicates images colorspace is different from Photoshops working colorspace - that's fine when the working space is aRGB and the image f.e. sRGB #3 (RGB/8) no *, no # in here indicates it is in Photoshops working colorspace. (RGB/8#) at the top would mean it is untagged, but when when colormanagement was OFF in that moment, it also would read as (RGB/8) or (RGB/16) (without an # or *) at the top, but "untagged" in the info panel at the bottom, even when the image has an embedded profile... On the otherhand - and this is the important part - the Photoshop (import) settings you provided here, tells that your PS is at "preserve embedded profiles" BUT "ask when opening" at profile mismatches. By this you will be asked whenever an image profile mismatches the working colorspace. The latter should be unchecked, anyway. So what have you been doing, when you were asked for image #1 and #2? With this settings and since their colorprofiles are different from PS working space, you must have been asked and have assigned a profile different from working space or you haven't been asked (because images colorspace and the working space was the same) and you assigned a different profile initially later. Or you have changed settings again and again when taking those screenshots.... When you say you see images as untagged in Bridge but in Photoshops info panel as "Adobe RGB (1998)" this can be, when a profile was added (assigned) after the image was imported to PS. Bridge will not know about that until you save the image. Will say: those of us trying to help, never know exactly what they are here looking at (maybe without realizing) Do we see a sRGB under an aRGB working space (RGB/8*) for #2? And #3, is this an aRGB image under an aRGB working space or a sRGB image under sRGB, (both would appear as RGB/8)? Or was the image untagged and colormanagement was off? Seems a bit chaotic, sorry. At least this is nothing on which I'ld be able to tell for sure what is going on. Next: the monitor  profile you sent to me, turns my U2410 dark and too much purple/reddish. Of  course there should be a differences (different monitor, different  environment light and my old eyes), but this is far to much - it hurt my eyes As  far I know, LR internal uses the Melissa color space (which is larger  than aRGB)  - I wonder what happens when RAW were processed via Meliassa  to aRGB with a too reddish monitor profile and are saved as untagged  aRGB....? I also wonder how LR can be configured to export to PSD without  they being tagged...?   Nevertheless, I was able to reproduce this once. For one of my PSDs the profile was removed, but at the moment I don't know how to reproduce that again. As said just make sure you images are tagged. But don't just apply a profile to those images already processed, when you don't know what really happend to them - it might get worse. Anyway. To solve your prob, you should forget about LR for  now and remove the monitor profile made with the Spyder, set the DELL  profile which comes with the CD and process images from scratch. Means  straight from NEF in one colorspace only -> via Photoshops ACR (output as aRGB and make sure aRGB is your  working space in PS), save them as PSD or TIFF and make sure they get tagged as aRGB. See if it makes a difference (color shift or not), when viewed  in Bridge. If there is no shift, start over with calibrating your monitor. Calibrating means setting the hardware right, by making sure the monitor was set to aRGB and brightness and contrast was adjusted, before you profilling it with the Spyder. If the problem still exists with this new profile and with images, which were processed by the above workflow and by the new conditions (make sure of that, the already processed images might be messed up) again let some one with an U2410 check the new profile. If its still have a huge red shift on another U2410, it might point to a hardware fault (either Monitor or Spyder) @MJOrts I notice that "Use Windows display calibration" is checked on in your screenshot.  AFAIK this setting means, that Windows is loading the LUT and not a third-party LUT-Loader, coming with the profiling device. Message was edited by: ablichter #1 (RGB/8*)* was edited - wasn't able to mark the wrong part by formating it <s>"striked"</s>, so I removed and corrected it ... View more