• 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: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>
  • Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 13:26:35 -0700

On Dec 12, 2003, at 4:14 PM, John Gnaegy 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.

The problem is the image in Safari has a nearly 100% chance of being displayed incorrectly, unless the image origin is the machine currently displaying the image, and from an application that doesn't use display compensation, or the editing space is based on a gamma 1.8 tone response.

Another problem is with ColorSync Preferences which explicitly states that the default profile selected will be used when a document does not contain embedded profiles, yet that's obviously not occurring, nor is it at all clear when it does occur.

If you have multiple displays you can set which one is the default using ColorSync Utility. Assigning any profile to untagged data is always a guessing game since you have no idea what the creation environment was. A case could have been made on either side of the issue, either assuming sRGB or assuming the display's profile, basically a no op. I imagine the choice came down on the side of assuming the display's profile for untagged data in order to have a unified behavior with other cocoa apps on the system.

These concerns are easily solved by deprecating gamma 1.8. Even though we still end up without display compensation, at least there is a far better chance that people will see web images (and increasingly images from digital cameras as well) in the ball park. Gamma makes a bigger difference than most anything else other than maybe gray balance, and right now Mac users start off at a disadvantage with gamma 1.8 tone response.

Those who want gamma 1.8 tone response should have the burden of making it happen (through calibration). Everyone else, i.e. the vast majority, should not have to do anything. That implies gamma 2.2 by default, in a world that still heavily depends on monitor RGB.

Chris Murphy
Color Remedies (TM)
www.colorremedies.com/realworldcolor
---------------------------------------------------------
Co-author "Real World Color Management"
Published by PeachPit Press (ISBN 0-201-77340-6)
_______________________________________________
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.

References: 
 >Panther, sRGB, web browsers (From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers (From: Steve Upton <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers (From: Chris Murphy <email@hidden>)
 >Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers (From: John Gnaegy <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Panther, sRGB, web browsers
  • 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