What is Digg?Sponsored by AVG
CNET Top Weekly Download for Free Anti-Virus view!
free.avg.com - 2.4 million people a week get AVG Anti-Virus Free, for the best protection against web threats.
241 Comments
- stonyhill, on 10/10/2007, -115/+302I've run into this before. If you upload a photo with attached color profile, Safari will render it, but other browsers will ignore it. If you output the photo with "Save for Web" in Photoshop, Photoshop will strip the color profile, and it will display identically in all browsers.
In my opinion, Safari is actually the "broken" behavior in this scenario. - rebotfc, on 10/10/2007, -15/+189Safari isnt broken, it just renders with a color profile, the image should look like the one on the right ( more saturated).
Most probably the image has an adobeRGB profile which has a wider gamut. - jmnormand, on 10/10/2007, -14/+161safari is designed to display color more accurately using the profiles. definitely not broken, and looks much more realistic. would be nice for all browsers to do this but since to be done properly it has to be calibrated to the hardware its a lot more difficult for other browsers. apple has a lock on their hardware so can take advantage of it in ways like this.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -7/+87Broken behavior? Safari is the one doing it correctly. It's reading the color profiles while the other ones ignore it. Luckily, Firefox 3 will fix this and implement color profiles.
- graviplana, on 10/10/2007, -6/+64Agreed. Safari will adjust an image if there is an attached profile. sRGB is a profile that was made by MS and HP to compete with Adobes domination of the Color, Design and Publishing Market. In Short sRGB was designed for the crappy gamma and less accurate color reproduction of most PC displays. Adobes profiles have favored the Mac platform with its better attention to color accuracy and also Adobes profiles allow more range in the blue, green and purple colors that often get truncated. However, Integrated Color Management did actually get off the ground on PC's faster than on Macs contrary to popular opinion. Anyway, Adobe's color profile would reproduce more colors more accurately when converted to CMYK color space from an RGB color space. Basically, s RGB is a way that MS and Hp wanted to usurp Apple and Adobe from the Graphics Number 1 Slot. Then, HP and MS made all these agreements with manufacturers to embed the sRGB color profile in devices and all sorts of printers. Basically, they're the reason why CMYK has gone away. They want to do everything in RGB from acquisition to print. In the realm of all things it's about business and money, I think. If you Google more you'll find lots of subjective FUD, so do your homework.
- narcissystem, on 10/10/2007, -1/+59wtf is on that plate?
- Jo9100, on 10/10/2007, -10/+55The More You Know
- kris33, on 10/10/2007, -0/+36The core of Safari that render images is Open Source.
- crash331, on 10/20/2007, -3/+37As a Photographer I can attest to the fact that web browsers fudge up colors about 98% of the time.
- jake57, on 10/10/2007, -20/+48Safari's text rendering compared to Firefox on OS X is also incredibly better.
- grumpyrain, on 10/10/2007, -0/+23Safari is the only (mainstream) color-space aware browser. A color-space is basically a way to define a color so that it appears identically on different devices. In terms of web experience, it usually isn't as critical as say a print designer that colors would exactly match. After all, the vast majority of your viewers won't have even calibrated their monitors.
On a technically level, Adobe RGB has a wider gamut and so is able to represent more colors. (But there are others with larger gamut than Adobe - like Pro Photo). sRGB was much easier to implement in the CRTs around at the time it became popular. - simX, on 10/10/2007, -13/+35"In my opinion, Safari is actually the 'broken' behavior in this scenario."
What?! Are you serious? If everybody's computer spontaneously combusted, and yours was the only one left, would you say that yours was the one that was broken? Just because no other browsers do it doesn't mean that they're right. Safari is definitely doing the right thing, here: if there's an embedded color profile, it should be used. If you want your image to display the same across all browsers, then strip the color profile first. - Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -2/+23So only 5% of your viewers can see how nice your photos look? Not really the best logic I've seen used. Of course, I can hardly fault Safari for respecting the color profile as it should, but this is the same kind of thing we faced when Firefox was just gaining popularity and half the web didn't work properly with it. Just like you still need to use a workaround to get transparent .png files in IE6, you need to take appropriate measures with your photos so they display properly in all browsers.
- cros, on 10/10/2007, -3/+23The person who posted the photo was slightly incorrect: they say they exported it as a JPG but it is clearly a PNG in the address. Safari will render any gamma settings contained in a PNG whereas other browsers will not. Effectively Safari is doing things correctly. This guy should check out GammaSlamma - I bet it would fix the problem but result in the drab photo being what is seen.
http://www.shealanforshaw.com/gammaslamma-11-updat ... - Konstantino, on 10/10/2007, -1/+20So because Safari does a better job of displaying colors, you'd rather not buy a Mac? (Regardless of this, Safari isn't the only browser for OS X, FYI).
- joshuaer, on 10/10/2007, -11/+30i agree why would the one doing what the file is telling it be the broken one. If i tell 4 people that they have to work late and get some paper work done, when i come back in the morning and one guy stayed late got it done and the other 3 went home and did nothing, who do you think would be first fired.
- amdinator, on 10/10/2007, -3/+20Too bad they deleted the pic on the website it refers to so I can't check for myself...
- superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -5/+22If you ever tried uploading an image in the Adobe RGB colorspace you sure wouldn't think Safari was the broken one!
- damndj, on 10/10/2007, -3/+19Um, what exactly is the commercial browser out of those three?
- geminitojanus, on 10/10/2007, -4/+19Most operating systems, including those using X11 (Linux, Solaris...), have some kind of framework for ICC color profiles. It wouldn't be any more or less difficult for those browsers to use that framework, as that's what it is there for. The main reason it's not used is because "nobody else uses it"; they try to keep a consistent look to images across all browsers and all platforms.
- MacSuxWindozSux, on 10/10/2007, -2/+17Reminds me of the DVD commercials at the beginning of VHS movies.
I'm using Firefox and the image I see is supposed to be the Safari improved version... - jer2eydevil88, on 10/10/2007, -2/+16I agree simply because Plugins > No Plugins...
Otherwise Safaris is a bit faster, resource friendly and more stable than Firefox. - DaffyDuck, on 10/10/2007, -1/+14It's not about which one is more realistic, it's about what the photographer wanted you to see. As an amateur photographer myself, I want viewers to see my photos using the color profiles because they get to see it the same (or closer) to what I intended them to look like.
- robbiekhan, on 10/10/2007, -5/+17If you're putting a photo for people to see online the SAME rules apply as if you were a web designer - you have to publish your work for the masses, not for those people with Safari just because you shot your photo using AdobeRGB.
It's the Photographers duty to convert the image to an sRGB format prior to uploading online so that browsers can universally display the colour as should be seen. - NebCanuck, on 10/10/2007, -3/+14Have you ever seen meat the same colour as the one on the right? If you have, I would advise you not to eat it...
- superkendall, on 10/10/2007, -1/+11??? Safari has tabs, has had them for a long time now....
- manitoba98xp, on 10/10/2007, -0/+10ICC color profiles are standard. The W3C box model is standard.
IE6's behavior is not. - ShrimpCrackers, on 10/10/2007, -3/+12Color Nazi's are why every McDonalds looks the same and why your left shoe is the same color as your right. Its important.
It also ensures a picture of Michael Jordan's jersey is in red and not pink. - PixelVision, on 10/10/2007, -0/+9Surely you should be optimizing for what your customers/viewers are using so to provide them with the best product, not the one easiest for you.
- Myonosken, on 10/10/2007, -2/+10Noone mentioned Mac.
- mrASSMAN, on 10/10/2007, -3/+11Firefox/Camino may not be rendering the image correctly, but the colors are actually more realistic than the image rendered by Safari. Looks overly-saturated to me.
- niczar, on 10/10/2007, -1/+9I suggest you read up a bit on "color spaces" before you comment on it. You clearly have no idea what this encompasses.
Hint: not all RGB devices can display the same gamut. And not all cameras can capture the same gamut. And just try taking a picture of the same object in plain day light, then at dawn, and then indoor with fluorescent lighting, and then incandescent lighting. - tekmonkey, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12Since when does higher color saturation and contrast mean better?
The one on the left has much more natural-looking colors. - GawtMilk, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8As someone who knows how to take and edit photographs, my online media is always saved with Photoshop's "Save For Web". It removes the color profile so that it looks very similar on all computers. Don't use your profession to seem like you know what you're talking about.
- dadzilla, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7You are nearly right. Actually the photo is an AdobeRGB (probably how the camera is set up for RAW images). Firefox and most browsers assume jpegs to be in sRGB, so the colors are mapped incorrectly.
- crazymunch, on 10/10/2007, -0/+7It's Carpaccio, FInely Sliced Raw meat, usually beef
Sounds nasty until you try it, it's actually quite tasty - marx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+8Firefox 3 added support for this.. just set true to gfx.color_management.enabled and be happy
- matbyrne, on 10/10/2007, -3/+10I'm a web designer too, but IE6 is clearly going against the standard in that situation. Some would say that IE is actually misinterpreting the guidelines.
Safari on the other hand is going out of it's way to try and do the right thing. As much as it pains me to say it, I'm with Safari on this one. There just needs to be more awareness of color profiles and how they should be handled on the web. - graviplana, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8The thing for Firefox and Camino developers to do is to make hooks in their programs to tie into the Integrated Color Management systems on PC and Mac platforms. Then Firefox and Camino will obey color profile settings. Further, if LINUX developers really want their platform to be credible and usable by professionals, they will develop a good ICM solution that obeys standard color profiles as well. GIMP users would definitely benefit. Hey Developers, are you listening? :) /2cents
- Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6That's because they're the same. Screenshots don't have embedded color profiles, so they'll render the same across the different browsers. At least ignoring jpeg compression and that kind of nonsense. If you want to have fun like that, VNC into the machine you're currently using, move the window around until it sees itself and does that two mirrors facing each other thing, and watch how the colors change in each successive window.
I should warn you that the last time I did that, I almost crashed my machine. It wasn't happy viewing a picture of a picture of a picture of a ... x50... picture of a picture of itself. - cyberoidx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+8Because our monitors can show the difference
- jcaino, on 10/10/2007, -0/+6id bet the one on the left is more akin to what it looked like in real life...
- KAMiKAZOW, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10Broken? Look at http://www.fotocommunity.de/pc/pc/mypics/435997/di ... and tell me which browser is broken.
Just FYI: http://flickr.com/photos/19616885@N00/1427698138/
Gecko (Firefox/Camino) on the left, Safari on the right. - graviplana, on 10/10/2007, -3/+9/Sigh. It's a shame that Color Spaces aren't taught in school by people that understand them better. My workflow for design projects involves acquisition in as wide a Gamut Color Space as possible. If the device that I'm using only works in sRGB, then once I get to my image programs, I CONVERT to Adobe RGB to do any editing or processing. THEN I either: convert to CMYK for print, or convert to sRGB for web, or keep Adobe RGB for web. sRGB is CRAP for colorspace, in terms of being a Photographer or Printer, sRGB is like the bastard child of color spaces. If you're photographing Greens or Blues or Purples, then sRGB is truncating and throwing away a lot of your content. YES, it's true! But yes, I have to output in sRGB sometimes. Sometimes I have to make Powerpoints and work with Excel documents also. :P If you're a serious Photographer, ditch sRGB and ditch JPEG for that matter - go to RAW and use a profile with a large Gamut, like Adobe RGB or Wide Gamut RGB. Also, go 16 bit as opposed to 8 bit images. Of course, if you're a serious photographer, then you know all of the above already. :P /2cents
http://www.signindustry.com/computers/articles/200 ...
This article is mostly accurate:
http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/sRGB-Ad ... - penneyisok, on 10/10/2007, -4/+10I toke his image and took a snap shot rendered in firefox and safari (top safari bottom firefox). There is a little noticeable difference.
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=1425793817 ...
Now some one take my snap shot of my image...wait maybe that is to much... - felipe82, on 10/10/2007, -3/+8prosciutto or some other type of ham
- Firehed, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Very true, but let's not forget that accurate/natural colors aren't always the most visually appealing. At first glance I liked the look of the image on the right better, but the left one is definitely more representative of what's actually in the scene.
I remember reading a while back that photo print stores often oversaturate the prints slightly for that reason - while less accurate, it looks better to most people. Some obscure thing regarding how the brain remembers scenes, I think. - Kazenodeku, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5http://www.alifewortheating.com/wp-content/uploads ...
This might be a "fixed" image though.
Looking at it in Firefox on a PC, it's somewhere in between the two screenshots shown. - jorgepblank, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6http://digg.com/software/Color_management_support_ ...
- Karmavs, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6Safari 3 does (the version in leopard, but that will be released for tiger too). (and firefox three also does colour correction - Yay Future!)
-
Show 51 - 100 of 245 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 