Skip to main content
Participating Frequently
October 31, 2007
Question

Photoshop CS3 color management "Save for Web" problem

  • October 31, 2007
  • 680 replies
  • 62094 views
This problem is getting the best of me.......

After spending 3 full days researching this problem, I am no closer to finding an answer than when I started. I still cannot produce a usable image through the "Save for Web" feature of Photoshop CS3. I have read web page after web page of "Tips, Tricks and Recommendations" from dozens of experts, some from this forum, and still I have no solution... I am exhausted and frustrated to say the least. Here's the simple facts that I know at this point.

I have a web design project that was started in PS CS1. All artwork was created in photoshop and exported to JPG format by using "Save for Web". Every image displays correctly in these browsers (Safari, Camino, FireFox and even Internet Explorer on a PC).

I have recently upgraded to PS CS3 and now cannot get any newly JPG'd image to display correctly. My original settings in CS1 were of no concern to me at the time, because it always just worked, and so I do not know what they were. I have opened a few of my previous images in CS3 and found that sRGB-2.1 displays them more or less accurately. I am using sRGB 2.1 working space. Upon openning these previous image files, I get the "Missing Profile" message and of course I select "Leave as is. Do Not color manage". CS3 assumes sRGB-2.1 working space, opens the file, and all is well.

The problem is when I go to "Save for Web", the saturation goes up, and the colors change. The opposite of what most people are reporting. Here's another important point... new artwork created in CS3 does exactly the same thing, so it's not because of the older CS1 files.

I have tried every combination of "uncompensated color", "Convert to sRGB", "ICC Profile", etc. while saving. I have Converted to sRGB before saving, and my monitor is calibrated correctly.
I have tried setting the "Save for Web" page on 2-up and the "original" on the left is already color shifted before I even hit the "Save" button. Of course, the "Optimized" image on the right looks perfect because I am cheating by selecting the "Use Document Color Profile" item. Why do they even have this feature if doesn't work, or misleads you?

Does anyone have any ideas what could be happening here? Why is this all so screwed up?
CS1 worked fine out of the box.

Final note: I do have an image file I could send along that demonstrates how it is possible to display an image exactly the same in all 4 of the browsers I mentioned with no color differences. It is untagged RGB and somehow it just works.

I am very frustrated with all of this and any suggestions will be appreciated

Thanks,
Pete
    This topic has been closed for replies.

    680 replies

    Participating Frequently
    March 12, 2008
    g-
    The grays DID look pretty neutral, though the sample image was pretty small given the resolution of my monitor. The flesh tones looking a little on the cool side was just the opinion of a couple of us here in the studio, more at how We might adjust the flesh tones vs. a scientific assessment of neutrality.

    Craig
    Participating Frequently
    March 12, 2008
    Thank you for the feedback, it is very interesting to me.
    >> sample images of tagged and untagged sRGB files in Safari (Mac) definitely display differently.

    A slight more saturation is expected in the sRGB rollover using proper profiled non-high-gamut LCDs

    The wide-gamut Dell LCD monitor here shows a cartoonish unacceptable red shift especially in the reds.
    >> The tagged file displays fleshtones a little too much on the cool/green side

    The tagged files are calibration files that should display very neutral grays and pleasing, natural skin tones -- so I am wondering why the calibrated Eizo is displaying them on the "cool/green side"?

    You need Safari to view them on the web in a test environment (I noted you were using Mac Safari).
    Participating Frequently
    March 12, 2008
    Using a profiled EIZO ColorEdge CG241W, g ballard's sample images of tagged and untagged sRGB files in Safari (Mac) definitely display differently. The thing is that neither version is really objectionable. The tagged file displays fleshtones a little too much on the cool/green side, and the untagged version is lighter and overly reddish.

    In my opinion, viewing images on the web is like looking at photos on newsprint, I never expect them to be representative. I've been hoping for several years that browsers would observe color tags, and maybe that day is drawing closer, but I think this would require a concerted campaign asking the W3C to put color management in its web specifications.

    In any case, I love the CG241W.

    Craig
    Ramón G Castañeda
    Inspiring
    March 11, 2008
    Better yet, make it impossible for any software to save an untagged image. :D
    March 11, 2008
    But doesn't it seem likely that if the wide-gamut Eizo (or any wide-gamut monitor) can switch to an sRGB mode, than that negates any benefit of having a wider gamut available? As far as I can tell the monitor itself is not going to be able to treat untagged images as sRGB while still offering up full gamut to images tagged as Adobe RGB. The only hope as I see it is:

    a) All major browsers begin to recognize embedded ICC tags AND have an option to assume a default colour profile in lieu of a tag.

    b) Similar function is made available -- either included in the OS or available as third-party software.
    Participating Frequently
    March 11, 2008
    My Apple 30" and my other LCDs all show a slight saturation boost in the sRGB pair.

    I remain optimistic that EIZO ColorEdge CG241W ($2,500 USD) wide gamut dual DVI connections hardware has a solution...it would be cool to have this monitor or the Eizo's 30" wide gamut at $5,000+.

    The older Ezio CG240W ($1,600) monitor (non-wide gamut) will certainly work with one DVI and One HD15 connectors, its dual CPU support and Eizo's 5-year warranty beat the Apple 23" hands down...
    Inspiring
    March 11, 2008
    All I see is better contrast when rollovered in Safari on a Mac.
    Participating Frequently
    March 11, 2008
    >> the less of a problem it really is

    The problem is it displays 98% of the internet way over saturated on the Mac OS X browsers (and I do occasionally surf the web).

    Eizo is supposed to test on Mac 10.5, Xrite profile and get back to me.

    If anyone is following this saga, I put a very simple test page up:
    http://www.gballard.net/photoshop/srgb_wide_gamut.html

    This should nail the problem and offer two ways to verify it...
    Inspiring
    March 10, 2008
    Pull yourself together , g. You can handle this. You've got to, you're our guru. Peter can talk you through this.
    Participating Frequently
    March 10, 2008
    "Is anyone using this monitor, it is high-gamut and I am wondering if the Mac will have the same problem displaying untagged sRGB on the internet? "

    Of course it will. It's not the monitor, it's the fact that the monitor color is a mismatch to the file color space, so ANY large gamut monitor will have the same "problem" if you call it that. The more you understand what's going on, the less of a problem it really is.