what on earth does windows 10 do to color profiles?

[Emirena]

I noticed this when trying to set night photos as deesktop backgrounds.

When I open JPGs in windows "photo" app they appear normal (brightness level as I wish). When I hit "edit" in this app, they darken significantly.

When I open them in photoshop, they appear normally (as I wish and as in windows preview).

Same phenomenon occurs when I try to set them as my desktop background: they appear much more dark than I wish, untrue to preview image (see screenshot comparisons).

Note, even when I open these screenshots after taking them, they appear much brighter when viewed as new JPG screenshot files than they did on screen when I took them.

I tried saving the original file (IMGP4677-* variants attached) with various assigned color profiles, and no difference is seen anywhere except within the windows photo preview.

Same darkening issue and untrue screenshot brightness phenomenon occurs.

I am using a microsoft surface laptop connected to a Dell ultrasharp monitor (displays "generic PNP monitor" under color profile in windows display settings?).

Can someone help me regain my sanity and tell me what's wrong with my color profiles?

I normally save every JPG as embedded - SRGB profile. I never noticed this before, and it doesn't seem to be occuring on photos from my old camera or that were edited in older versions of photoshop as opposed to new lightroom mobile and photoshop camera raw 14.3. (imgp4677.jpg contained LR custom masks and brightness edits to bring up the foreground significantly without killing the night sky black level totally).

[D Fosse]

The Windows desktop is not color managed. It ignores the embedded document profile, and it ignores your monitor profile. It just sends the RGB numbers straight to screen.

Windows Photos recently (and silently) got full color management, and the new versions should display correctly and 100% identically to Photoshop.

The difference is often very obvious in predominantly dark images. Most LCD displays have a native dip in the shadows, making shadows appear darker than they really are. The monitor profile accounts for this (since it's based on actual measurement), and a color managed application will display all shadows correctly and lighter.

[Emirena]

what's the best way for me to set a desktop background image with color as seen in photoshop or windows Photos, if possible at all, then? I've saved and re-saved with "do not color manage" and other settings and still no dice.

I forgot that although straight bitmaps, JPGs still display differently depending on color profiles. I first encountered this when posting camera photos set to adobe RGB to instagram - they all appeared faded. I set my camera and photoshop export settings to sRGB and fixed that.

Is there a way to save the correct appearance i want for desktop background images?

[D Fosse · Accepted solution]

Convert the image to your monitor profile. Then the numbers will be in your monitor color space and it will display correctly on your monitor (but nowhere else!)

That answers your question and the thread can be closed.

I need to emphasize that this is not something you normally want to do. It breaks color management everytwhere else. But if it's important to have a desktop image correctly displayed, this is how you do it.

[Bob_Hallam]

Sadly Windows 10 and its previous iterations are not 100% color-managed like the Mac OS.  Sure it would be an average user's expectation, but the WCS team cannot do it all and have somewhat limited access to the entire OS. If your expectations haven't been managed by this comment and you want the whole OS to be color managed, then buy a Mac.  They are the best tools for color at present.  

[D Fosse]

The whole operating system is not color managed on Mac. If that was true, you wouldn't need application color management at all, you could use all non-color managed software. Obviously you can't do that. What is true is that more of the native applications - if you use them! - are color managed.

If you gather some statistics over color management bugs and problems here in the forum, you will see that MacOS certainly does no better. I'd say quite the opposite. Almost all problems on Windows are bad monitor profiles from the monitor manufacturers, which is entirely outside Microsoft's control. Other than that Windows color management is extremely reliable and robust.

As photographer at an art museum, my whole job relies on critically accurate color. This is what I work with every day.

[TheDigitalDog]

https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/technotes/tn2313/_index.html

ColorSync is the color management system provided in OS X. It is the OS X implementation of the International Color Consortium (ICC) specification, providing system-level color management of images, documents, and devices. ColorSync consists of several parts as shown in Figure 5.

[NB, colourmanagement net]

As I thought Andrew, thanks - great document that

"[Apple's] ColorSync is the color management system provided in OS X. It is the OS X implementation of the International Color Consortium (ICC) specification, providing system-level color management of images, documents, and devices. ColorSync consists of several parts as shown in Figure 5.

It includes a color management module (CMM). This is a mathematical engine that converts color data from one device to another. OS X ships a default CMM, the Apple CMM, as part of ColorSync. ColorSync also provides a plugin architecture for CMM's. If you have written a custom CMM to use in your application there is a specific plugin API to invoke it.

ColorSync uses ICC profiles for color matching or color conversion across different color spaces. ICC profiles characterize devices in terms of color capabilities. They contain mathematical primitives that describe how to convert data between device color space and a reference color space called the profile connection space (PCS) . A PCS is a device-independent color space used as an intermediate when converting from one device-dependent color space to another. Colorsync includes profiles for different color spaces with OS X, and you can add your own profiles as well.

ColorSync has a device integration database. Every device that is connected to the Mac will be registered with the device integration database. This provides an opportunity for device developers to integrate their device and any associated profiles with ColorSync. If the device manufacturer provides factory ICC profiles these will be registered with the device integration database for use as needed. In addition, the user can assign custom profiles to a device."

https://developer.apple.com/library/archive/technotes/tn2313/_index.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/DTS4001...

I hope this helps
neil barstow, colourmanagement net :: adobe forum volunteer:: co-author: 'getting colour right'
google me "neil barstow colourmanagement" for lots of free articles on colour management

[D Fosse]

This discussion would be a lot more fruitful if people could refrain from ignorant statements like "Macs are the best tool for color". If you know what you're doing, you can argue that Windows is a much more reliable tool for accurate color.

Yes, in Mac, profile conversions are called by the application but executed by the OS. In Windows, it's all executed by the application. That has never been a secret! We all know that.

But that has one important implication: there's one less layer where bugs and problems can happen. The whole system is simpler and more reliable. As long as the application does it right, it will be right. It also means troubleshooting is a lot easier. If an application is not doing it right, you spot it immediately. The whole thing is more transparent.

And make no mistake: it just works.

So please, don't try to make us believe that Mac is "better", because it isn't. It's different. Some people prefer that, that's fine. But some of us, who really rely on accurate color, prefer Windows for that reason.

So - can we stop this?

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@D Fosse wrote:

This discussion would be a lot more fruitful if people could refrain from ignorant statements like "Macs are the best tool for color".

So - can we stop this?

---

I missed that statement, where was it? 

[D Fosse]

Bob. That's the post I really have an issue with here, and it's not contributing to a constructive discussion.

[TheDigitalDog]

---

@D Fosse wrote:

Bob. That's the post I really have an issue with here, and it's not contributing to a constructive discussion.

---

Is Windows 10 and its previous iterations 100% color-managed like the Mac OS? Don't know, don't do Windows. 

[D Fosse]

Why does it matter where in the code color management is done, as long as it works? Personally I don't care one bit. I care about reliability and predictability, and that's what I get on Windows.

[TheDigitalDog]

I'm asking if what Bob said was accurate or not; I don't know if Windows is as he states. You did tell us Windows desktop isn't color managed right? It certainly is on the Mac so there is that....

[Per Berntsen]

For the record, the Desktop, the File Explorer and Paint are not color managed on Windows 10. I'm guessing that Windows 11 is no different.

It's not really an issue for me, since I don't use any of them to view images, but desktop icons and thumbnails do display over saturated on my wide gamut monitor.

The only color managed native applications are the Edge browser and the Photos app.

[Bob_Hallam]

If you RE-read my post you will see that what I actually said is true.  The whole OS on Windows is not color managed and if that's what the OP requires them Mac is the solution.  If you are happy with WCS that has no bearing on the users issue (desktop image is very different) because your experience and workflow are in fact different.  I'm not speaking to that experience in my response. 

[D Fosse]

Deleted. Too much said about this already. Let's move on.