Photoshop CS3 color management "Save for Web" problem

[_Peter_Mars_]

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

[Guest]

Even when properly profiled and calibrated, it will have the saturation "problem" when viewing untagged images (or tagged images in non-colour managed software). It took these 600+ posts for me to learn that! I think it compares very favorably to the ACD's, maybe better since it can display wider gamut than sRGB, but that wider gamut is what causes the saturation shift (in non-colour managed environments).

Great for photo editting, not so great for casual web viewing.

[_g_ballard_]

Thanks, my 30" ACD has a slight saturation shift on my MacPro tower, but I recall someone was talking about the Dell newer 08 models addressed this problem.

As I want to use it on a G5 I am buying right now to (go back and) run 10.4 and CS2 apps reliably to do web color work and GoLive, I want it to have good color.

The OP and others with the problem were saying their Dells were displaying cartoonish untagged sRGB color when they hardware calibrated them.

The Dell I'm looking at has the HDMI-DVI and Rotate features I'm looking for -- their sales person quoted me $549, free shipping...

[Lundberg02]

Why not ask the Dry Creek Photo guy what the deal is with Dells and their gamut. The only thing they could have is a better illuminant and and better blue filter. They're still fluorescent lighted.

[_g_ballard_]

yep, giant saturation boost viewing untagged sRGB with the OEM DELL 2408WFP profile -- so it appears at first glance not tied to using a custom profile

[_g_ballard_]

Eye-one display2 PROFILED to 2.2/6500/140luminance -- same saturation boost viewing untagged sRGB...

[Lundberg02]

In all three colors or just red and blue?

[_g_ballard_]

reds jump a lot -- like Assigning AdobeRGB to a sRGB file in Photoshop

[_Peter_Figen_]

"like Assigning AdobeRGB to a sRGB file in Photoshop "

That's EXACTLY what you're doing when you monitor space is close to Adobe RGB...

[_g_ballard_]

don't know about exactly but it certainly emulates the problem

++++++++

I seemed to have solved the mystery for getting usable color out of untagged sRGB on this Dell Ultrasharp 2408WFP.

There is a "sRGB" choice in the monitor hardware menu: PRESET MODES> sRGB

While this likely has a dumbing-down governing effect on the wide gamut this monitor can put out, it makes untagged sRGB a lot more closer to my calibrated CRT and Sony and Apple LCDs.

This is great because its PC> GRAPHICS>DESKTOP setting is unusable for viewing the internet (unless you like cartoon colors). Even hardware-profiled screen was leaning on the reds in this mode.

I may look into this more later when I get my used G5, but for now my curiosity is satisfied

[_g_ballard_]

okay, sRGB preset looks like a cheap PC CRT, literally

I found a CUSTOM RGB preset and it gave me access to adjustable RGB levels (like the old CRT adjustable RGB guns).

The Eye-One Match software allowed me to balance them out -- all three were maxed 100% by default, and the puck said the green level was way out in front.

Turning down green and leveling them out equal seems to have corrected the problem in BOTH Photoshop and untagged sRGB -- sRGB> Photoshop> View> Proof Setup> Monitor RGB slightly over saturates the color very much like my 30" Apple Display.

I am not sure if this is the best answer, but it looks like it is working good here (in Presets Mode> Custom RGB> balance out the levels and build the profile)...

[_Peter_Figen_]

I read somewhere recently, and it may have been on the Colorsync list, that the preset for sRGB was basically a hardware dumbing down to something close to sRGB, but then you couldn't take advantage of any high bit internal data for calibration. I don't know exactly what's happening there with the options you' re now using, but my guess is that you've now probably used software adjustments in the LUT to do the same thing. While it may solve the untaggged sRGB situation ( I would not call it a problem) it may well introduce other things into the mix like coarser gradients, reduced gamut, and possibly on screen posterization. Also, if your colorimeter isn't made for a wide gamut display, that may be causing you grief too.

[_g_ballard_]

If you figure out what's going on with balancing the RGB in a Custom RGB preset mode, please let me know...

I will drop back in after some time working with my last profile and settings...

How do I know if my puck/software is made for wide-gamut display?

I spoke with Xrite a couple days ago before ordering this monitor and the tech guy didn't have any info on using his hardware-software package on the 'new wide-gamut LCD monitors greatly saturating untagged sRGB' issues I asked about.

[Lundberg02]

It seems likely that Dell, from what you describe, has found a way to produce a wider red spectrum from the fluorescent light, and possibly a better blue filter.

[_g_ballard_]

A follow-up email to Xrite was answered with useless canned out-of-date dribble...

Dell, on the other hand, said the untagged sRGB saturation boost on the internet was to be expected with the Mac OS.

They said Windows OS doesn't have the problem on the internet with untagged sRGB (it applies sRGB profile to untagged color on the internet).

So I booted my Mac Pro into Windows Vista and confirmed in Safari, the sRGB tagged/untagged rollover has zero change and the rest of the internet looks normal.

So the answer is either 1) Mac OS needs to Assume sRGB on the internet, or 2) Dell needs a Mac button -- any bets on which will happen first?

So if you have a Mac, don't buy the high-gamut LCD monitors for web work/surfing (unless you are color blind or want a headache).

[_g_ballard_]

EIZO ColorEdge CG241W ($2,500 USD)

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?

Or the standard gamut EIZO ColorEdge CG240W... Is this screen worth $1,600?

[_Peter_Figen_]

"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.

[Lundberg02]

Pull yourself together , g. You can handle this. You've got to, you're our guru. Peter can talk you through this.

[_g_ballard_]

>> 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...

[Lundberg02]

All I see is better contrast when rollovered in Safari on a Mac.

[_g_ballard_]

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...

[Guest]

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.

[Ramón_G_Castañeda]

Better yet, make it impossible for any software to save an untagged image. :D

[_Craig_Cheatham_]

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

[_g_ballard_]

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).