<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Firefox 3: Color profile support (oh the pretty, pretty colors)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/</link>
	<description>intrepid girl reporter</description>
	<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 09:35:48 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: philw</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59391</link>
		<dc:creator>philw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2008 14:59:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59391</guid>
		<description>Embedding profiles in jpegs is interesting but hardly significant, at least for Windows users.

The fact that FF3 with CM enabled reads and uses your monitor's profile is huge. Until this, FF (like IE etc) would just ignore the monitor profile. Now it renders colours the way their creators intended them to be seen. Forget embedded profiles, enjoy accurate managed colour in Windows.

I hesitate to mention it, but in Windows Vista at least, Safari does not deliver Colour Managed output - it does take note of embedded profiles, but it does not use the monitor's profile at all. That was such a shame but there it is.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Embedding profiles in jpegs is interesting but hardly significant, at least for Windows users.</p>
<p>The fact that FF3 with CM enabled reads and uses your monitor&#8217;s profile is huge. Until this, FF (like IE etc) would just ignore the monitor profile. Now it renders colours the way their creators intended them to be seen. Forget embedded profiles, enjoy accurate managed colour in Windows.</p>
<p>I hesitate to mention it, but in Windows Vista at least, Safari does not deliver Colour Managed output - it does take note of embedded profiles, but it does not use the monitor&#8217;s profile at all. That was such a shame but there it is.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Rick</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59345</link>
		<dc:creator>Rick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 15:26:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59345</guid>
		<description>Shoot me down if you like as I am only a novice in this field, but I have been playing with it for a bit. I noticed, and other people have reported that, although switching this on fixes photographs to better colours, it messes up the rest of the screen - CSS colours etc. Mine went all pinkish. So my first thought was that we needed to set the display_profile in FF to be correct for the monitor but this didn't do it. The next thing I tried was to set the display_profile to C:\WINDOWS\system32\spool\drivers\color\sRGB Color Space Profile.icm and that seems to solve all the problems. The photographs are correct as checked with Brad Carlile's site http://bradcarlile.com/blog/misc/firefox-3-to-be-a-color-managed-browser/ and the greys remain grey on the rest of the screen.

To my uneducated mind, it looks like FF is applying the screen profile to colours that don't have their own profile (CSS and GIF) and the windows display driver is doing it again. Setting the display_profile to sRGB stops it doing that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Shoot me down if you like as I am only a novice in this field, but I have been playing with it for a bit. I noticed, and other people have reported that, although switching this on fixes photographs to better colours, it messes up the rest of the screen - CSS colours etc. Mine went all pinkish. So my first thought was that we needed to set the display_profile in FF to be correct for the monitor but this didn&#8217;t do it. The next thing I tried was to set the display_profile to C:\WINDOWS\system32\spool\drivers\color\sRGB Color Space Profile.icm and that seems to solve all the problems. The photographs are correct as checked with Brad Carlile&#8217;s site <a href="http://bradcarlile.com/blog/misc/firefox-3-to-be-a-color-managed-browser/" rel="nofollow">http://bradcarlile.com/blog/misc/firefox-3-to-be-a-color-managed-browser/</a> and the greys remain grey on the rest of the screen.</p>
<p>To my uneducated mind, it looks like FF is applying the screen profile to colours that don&#8217;t have their own profile (CSS and GIF) and the windows display driver is doing it again. Setting the display_profile to sRGB stops it doing that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Campbell</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59312</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Campbell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 23:47:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59312</guid>
		<description>What?!?  Several dozen posts and not a single Opera-cultist bleating?   Wow.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What?!?  Several dozen posts and not a single Opera-cultist bleating?   Wow.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris H</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59308</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 17:12:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59308</guid>
		<description>I think it's a good move for Firefox, certainly, but is no the solution to washed-out web photos until EVERYONE is using a color-managed browser, which won't be for several years at least. What's more important than your own photos looking good on your own flickr page on your own computer is what they look like to other people on different computers.

The solution, for now, is to convert your images to sRGB before uploading to flickr. It is a smaller gamut than AdobeRGB or whatever you happen to use in Photoshop, but that should never be noticeable (at least without a wide-gamut display as someone discussed above.) 

This way, your photos should look identical on flickr and in photoshop, and more importantly, that's what absolutely everyone else will see as well (besides the fact that most won't have their monitors calibrated equally.)

If you're using Lightroom, the Export dialog will convert to sRGB for you without touching your original. It's a little more annoying in Photoshop (though there could be a better way) but is only a couple of extra clicks.

Of course, because not everyone does this, it could still be worth using the FF3 color profile option to ensure that you see other photos on flickr they way the photographer sees them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think it&#8217;s a good move for Firefox, certainly, but is no the solution to washed-out web photos until EVERYONE is using a color-managed browser, which won&#8217;t be for several years at least. What&#8217;s more important than your own photos looking good on your own flickr page on your own computer is what they look like to other people on different computers.</p>
<p>The solution, for now, is to convert your images to sRGB before uploading to flickr. It is a smaller gamut than AdobeRGB or whatever you happen to use in Photoshop, but that should never be noticeable (at least without a wide-gamut display as someone discussed above.) </p>
<p>This way, your photos should look identical on flickr and in photoshop, and more importantly, that&#8217;s what absolutely everyone else will see as well (besides the fact that most won&#8217;t have their monitors calibrated equally.)</p>
<p>If you&#8217;re using Lightroom, the Export dialog will convert to sRGB for you without touching your original. It&#8217;s a little more annoying in Photoshop (though there could be a better way) but is only a couple of extra clicks.</p>
<p>Of course, because not everyone does this, it could still be worth using the FF3 color profile option to ensure that you see other photos on flickr they way the photographer sees them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Curtis</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59301</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Curtis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2008 10:59:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59301</guid>
		<description>To those trying to install the Color Management plugin - if you don't want to register with the addons.mozilla.org site, just go to the author's homepage and download it from there, then open the .xpi file with FF3</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To those trying to install the Color Management plugin - if you don&#8217;t want to register with the addons.mozilla.org site, just go to the author&#8217;s homepage and download it from there, then open the .xpi file with FF3</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Shane Halloran</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59286</link>
		<dc:creator>Shane Halloran</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 23:04:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59286</guid>
		<description>I've enabled the enhanced colour settings, and noticed a difference, but I wonder is the perceived difference due more to a 'placebo' effect than anything else ;-) .

Like your Flickr set!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve enabled the enhanced colour settings, and noticed a difference, but I wonder is the perceived difference due more to a &#8216;placebo&#8217; effect than anything else ;-) .</p>
<p>Like your Flickr set!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: chris murphy</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59248</link>
		<dc:creator>chris murphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:20:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59248</guid>
		<description>While I applaud color management in FF3, I think the all or nothing approach and the default is unfortunate. I understand why full color management on was not desirable for default behavior.

But, instead of all on, or all off (default), a 3rd option should have been explored and that is to perform color management on images that have ICC profiles embedded in them. There aren't many such images on the internet, but those people who have embedded profiles have usually done so for a reason and this metadata should be honored. This is how Safari works. PNG and JPEG support ICC profiles, GIF does not. TIFF does as well but rarely used on the internet.

Case in point, I find it unfortunate that FF3 which has this capability built into it now, completely disregards embedded ICC profiles in images, so they actually display incorrectly. Example: http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter

The issue of color management on all platforms is an increasing problem. In the past, we could assume average displays had nearly sRGB like behavior, and target images and web content to that color space. Of course this is a slight problem on the Macintosh were its tone reproduction curve is defined by gamma 1.8 instead of gamma 2.2 like on other systems. But a much bigger problem than this, an one that affects all platforms, is that display technologies are diverging from sRGB rather than converging on it. We already have affordable wide-gamut displays, that once were in the $10000 range now in the $1400 range, and this will get even lower.

So it's good this functionality is in FF3. Really the primary hold out is Flash. Once that's color managed, then everything can be, without surprises.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>While I applaud color management in FF3, I think the all or nothing approach and the default is unfortunate. I understand why full color management on was not desirable for default behavior.</p>
<p>But, instead of all on, or all off (default), a 3rd option should have been explored and that is to perform color management on images that have ICC profiles embedded in them. There aren&#8217;t many such images on the internet, but those people who have embedded profiles have usually done so for a reason and this metadata should be honored. This is how Safari works. PNG and JPEG support ICC profiles, GIF does not. TIFF does as well but rarely used on the internet.</p>
<p>Case in point, I find it unfortunate that FF3 which has this capability built into it now, completely disregards embedded ICC profiles in images, so they actually display incorrectly. Example: <a href="http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter" rel="nofollow">http://www.color.org/version4html.xalter</a></p>
<p>The issue of color management on all platforms is an increasing problem. In the past, we could assume average displays had nearly sRGB like behavior, and target images and web content to that color space. Of course this is a slight problem on the Macintosh were its tone reproduction curve is defined by gamma 1.8 instead of gamma 2.2 like on other systems. But a much bigger problem than this, an one that affects all platforms, is that display technologies are diverging from sRGB rather than converging on it. We already have affordable wide-gamut displays, that once were in the $10000 range now in the $1400 range, and this will get even lower.</p>
<p>So it&#8217;s good this functionality is in FF3. Really the primary hold out is Flash. Once that&#8217;s color managed, then everything can be, without surprises.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sandeep</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59188</link>
		<dc:creator>Sandeep</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 07:38:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59188</guid>
		<description>Turning on colour management in FF3 has most certainly improved colour vibrancy. Even Gmail looks better! Thanks for the FF3 guide and your blogs helping me to enjoy this new feature. So far I really like FF3.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Turning on colour management in FF3 has most certainly improved colour vibrancy. Even Gmail looks better! Thanks for the FF3 guide and your blogs helping me to enjoy this new feature. So far I really like FF3.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brad</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59152</link>
		<dc:creator>Brad</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 20:58:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59152</guid>
		<description>Great job getting Firefox3 out and I really like the color management, I wrote about it here:
http://bradcarlile.com/blog/misc/firefox-3-to-be-a-color-managed-browser/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great job getting Firefox3 out and I really like the color management, I wrote about it here:<br />
<a href="http://bradcarlile.com/blog/misc/firefox-3-to-be-a-color-managed-browser/" rel="nofollow">http://bradcarlile.com/blog/misc/firefox-3-to-be-a-color-managed-browser/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jennifer</title>
		<link>http://www.dria.org/wordpress/archives/2008/04/29/633/#comment-59134</link>
		<dc:creator>Jennifer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jun 2008 17:34:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dria.org/wordpress/?p=633#comment-59134</guid>
		<description>The link to that color profile addon times out, I'm afraid.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The link to that color profile addon times out, I&#8217;m afraid.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
