• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers


  • Subject: Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
  • From: Richard Wagner <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 11:02:18 -0700

Perhaps I don't fully understand, but this seems like an appallingly
bad decision to me. Virtually no images displayed in Panther are likely
to have been created on the computer displaying the images. Why would I
want the images to match images created on my computer using a
non-color savvy program? Based on the previous behavior of all other
browsers that I'm aware of, I've always converted my images to sRGB for
web display, and I believe a majority of the images created by web
designers for the web make the same assumption.

Ric Cohn

I think we all understand, and I agree that this was an appallingly bad decision on Apple's part. For a company that pioneered the use of ICC profiles and color management via Colorsync, one has to wonder what's going on over there. From Safari not handling embedded profiles in images displayed from HTML pages (how many images on the Web are not?) to the insistence on sticking with a default gamma of 1.8 with OS X, when a clean break could have been made to a gamma of 2.2, to the decision to use an individual monitor's DEVICE profile as the default color space for untagged images...boy, some poor decision making.

John wrote:
> Safari assumes untagged images to be in the space of the default
> display's profile. This is the same behavior as Preview, so the nice
> thing is an image opened in Preview looks the same as an image opened
> in Safari, whether it has an embedded profile or not.

No, the nice thing would have been for Safari and Preview to assume that untagged images are sRGB. Untagged images would still "look the same" and almost all Web images would then be color managed correctly (sRGB [web standard] --> display profile). Then the hassle for Web designers of trying to make images look acceptable for both Macs and Windows users would be simplified, and every tiny JPEG would not need to have an embedded profile to display correctly (not that they would under Safari now, anyway!). In fact, Apple could tell developers that the default color space for the Mac interface was sRGB, and really make life simple. Add a few routines for developers to convert screen captures, etc., from the device profile's space to sRGB before saving, and...But, hey, that sounds like standardization. I agree with others that, at a minimum, Apple should make the "default" assumed profile in Safari, Preview, etc. a user-selectable preference.

--Rich

<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
Richard Wagner
WildNaturePhotos, LLC
email@hidden
www.WildNaturePhotos.com
Member ASMP | NANPA
<><><><><><><><><><><><><>
_______________________________________________
colorsync-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/colorsync-users
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
      • From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
  • Prev by Date: Re: Using Gretag InkFormulation and Eye-one
  • Next by Date: Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
  • Previous by thread: Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
  • Next by thread: Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread