Horrible sRGB export problems with Aperture (help!)

[Tritium]

This is driving me crazy - I've spent at least 5 hours trying to figure out what's going on to no avail.

When I "export version" from aperture and use "sRGB Profile" as the export color space, images still look different in non-color managed applications than they do in aperture (or any other color managed app.)

What's going on!?! I thought that sRGB was a profile that would essentially provide no color management, and thus what you saw in an sRGB profiled image was exactly what you'd get in an application with no color management, at least if you stayed on the same computer.

Here's an example of what I get, this image is straight out of aperture: http://asdf.gs/broken.jpg

Save it to disk, open it in Preview and then in Firefox. It will look different! Check out the profile in preview - it's sRGB. I can't explain it, can you help me?

 

[jfelbab]

This is driving me crazy - I've spent at least 5 hours trying to
figure out what's going on to no avail.

When I "export version" from aperture and use "sRGB Profile" as the
export color space, images still look different in non-color
managed applications than they do in aperture (or any other color
managed app.)

What's going on!?! I thought that sRGB was a profile that would
essentially provide no color management, and thus what you saw in
an sRGB profiled image was exactly what you'd get in an application
with no color management, at least if you stayed on the same
computer.

Here's an example of what I get, this image is straight out of
aperture: http://asdf.gs/broken.jpg

Save it to disk, open it in Preview and then in Firefox. It will
look different! Check out the profile in preview - it's sRGB. I
can't explain it, can you help me?

Color images with an ICC tag will nearly always look different in a color managed app than they do in a non-managed app (like Firefox). If you save your image with the sRGB profile and open it in an app that supports color management it should look the same. Try opening your image in Safari and not Firefox and your result should look closer to what you set in Aperture.
--
Jim (Novice photographer - learning more every day)

 

[aj_taylor]

You're working on the assumption that applications that don't use ICC profiles basically treat everything as sRGB. That's fine, except you might want to consider the impact of gamma. Your default gamma on the Mac is 1.8, the default on a PC is 2.2. If a browser ignores the ICC profile, then it also ignores the gamma set in the image. This can give you problems.

Try setting your default gamma to 2.2, see how you get on.

 

[Tritium]

My monitor profile is configured with 2.2 gamma. Changing to 1.8 doesn't fix this issue.

 

[Frag]

Hmm, I did as you suggested and they both look pretty much the same to me on my profiled MacBook Pro 15in...

 

[Frag]

OK, I take it back. The colors look richer in Preview...

 

[Tritium]

Yeah, it's not a huge difference but the colors aren't exactly the same. It flies in the face of everything I've understood about color management and publishing for the web, so I'm really upset by it.

Do you use aperture? Can you develop a photo with some really rich colors and compare it in preview vs firefox? Maybe there's just something wrong with my computer? (maybe?!)

 

[V10]

Tritium,

When you export jpeg, select the export preset you are going to use, and then edit it. For the ColorSync profile, choose whatever profile you are currently using in the Color tab of the Displays preference panel. For me, this is "Color LCD". Export with this setting and Safari, Firefox, and Windows Explorer should all display your image very similarly. You may just want to create an export setting for DPReview.

I struggled with this when posting pictures of my dog recently.

View this page on all of your different browsers and platforms and see if the images are pretty close.
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1007&message=21824325
--
Brian

 

[Tritium]

That works! The images look "correct" in firefox on this monitor now. Thanks much! I can finally sleep!

Can anyone explain why this happens? Or at least provide pointers to a site explaining what the hell is going on?

I always thought that an sRGB tagged image would be displayed exactly the same way in a color managed app and a non color managed app. Why isn't it? My brain is melting.

 

[Matt F]

Not to interrupt your sleep, but have you tested how the images look on other monitors? I.e. if you upload them somewhere, then view in different browsers on PC/Mac?

In other words, is this fix just for your Mac, or is it universal?

That works! The images look "correct" in firefox on this monitor
now. Thanks much! I can finally sleep!

Can anyone explain why this happens? Or at least provide pointers
to a site explaining what the hell is going on?

I always thought that an sRGB tagged image would be displayed
exactly the same way in a color managed app and a non color managed
app. Why isn't it? My brain is melting.

--
-- Pmatt
Gallery - http://www.silentcolor.com

 

[mxs]

I agree that this sounds like a fix only for your particular computer. Because generally there's no way that your profile tagged with your image would work well on my monitor. The chances must be like 1 in 1mil. ....

Unless I am missing something of course, I think there's still something wrong as if I do the same from PC CS2 (export jpeg with sRGB tagged) it looks pretty much the same everywhere else. Except for Preview though. This app in my opinion oversaturates everything you throw at it. Sort of like iPhoto showing everything oversaturated. I never bothered to figure out why.

I just got Aperture installed the other day so I will be messing around with it.

Regards

Marek

 

[V10]

I'm not sure, but what I think we're seeing is that Aperture will only export with a ColorSync Profile. This means there is the image (typically lacking in color and contrast) + the colorsync profile that will make it look "correct". Because of this, applications that do not support ICC INDUSTRY STANDARD color profiles will read your image data, but NOT apply the profile to make them look correct.

Both Firefox 1 and 2 as well as Windows Explorer lack ICC ColorSync support. Even the old version of IE that Microsoft used to bundle in Mac OS X had the option to turn on ColorSync support.

In my testing, exporting with ANY other profile than "ColorLCD" left images with little color or contrast in Mac Firefox, and Windows XP Explorer browsers. My testing of Windows Explorer was limited to running it in Parallels on the same computer that I used to test the other browsers so there may be gamma issues where the image will be darker on a PC since the standard is 2.2 gamma rather than the Mac's 1.8.

Perhaps what we need in Aperture is a way to save a file with the colors "BURNED IN" in the sRGB space, instead of using the ColorSync profile to give us the sRBG colorspace we are looking for.
--
Brian

 

[V10]

Marek,

I agree with your statment, as the images do look slightly different between my MacBook Pro LCD. However my goal is strictly to get output that looks "good enough" so that images are not muddy or washed out on other browsers or platforms, regardless of the shenanigans that have to be done to get there (as long as it's easy to perform). If I were concerned about critical color I agree with you completely. I also still don't know why Firefox and Windows Explorer deal with images so much better when they have the Color LCD profile attached because they don't support it anyway.

--
Brian

 

[Matt F]

If you are correct, this would be a huge shortcoming of Aperture. It would mean you would have no way of exporting jpegs that are usable on the web for general cross-platform viewing.

I just switched to Mac this weekend, and have not installed Aperture yet, though I am planning on trying it out.

I did do some conversions with Bibble, and I am not seeing these problems. Exported jpegs have an embedded srgb profile, and look identical in preview, safari, and firefox.

I would suggest that the original poster ask about this on the Aperture forums on the Apple Support - Discussions site, and let us know what he finds out.

I'm not sure, but what I think we're seeing is that Aperture will
only export with a ColorSync Profile. This means there is the image
(typically lacking in color and contrast) + the colorsync profile
that will make it look "correct". Because of this, applications
that do not support ICC INDUSTRY STANDARD color profiles will read
your image data, but NOT apply the profile to make them look
correct.

Both Firefox 1 and 2 as well as Windows Explorer lack ICC ColorSync
support. Even the old version of IE that Microsoft used to bundle
in Mac OS X had the option to turn on ColorSync support.

In my testing, exporting with ANY other profile than "ColorLCD"
left images with little color or contrast in Mac Firefox, and
Windows XP Explorer browsers. My testing of Windows Explorer was
limited to running it in Parallels on the same computer that I used
to test the other browsers so there may be gamma issues where the
image will be darker on a PC since the standard is 2.2 gamma rather
than the Mac's 1.8.

Perhaps what we need in Aperture is a way to save a file with the
colors "BURNED IN" in the sRGB space, instead of using the
ColorSync profile to give us the sRBG colorspace we are looking for.
--
Brian

--
-- Pmatt
Gallery - http://www.silentcolor.com

 

[V10]

I meant to say that the images do look slightly different between my MacBook Pro LCD and my Apple 23" Cinema display. Not enough for me to care since it's just a web gallery. Isn't there a way to edit your own posts?
--
Brian

 

[noirdesir]

No CM means the RGB values are displayed using the screen profile. If you want to have your photos to look the same in CM-ed apps and non-CM-ed apps on your computer, select your screen profile upon exporting.

But since it is highly unlikely that anybody else has the same screen profile (and same screen) as you do, the photos will look different on basically all computers (as long as not viewed in CM-ed apps and on properly profiled screens).

 

[mxs]

Hi Brian,

it starts making sense now. So what Aperture does is basically exporting a flat file (not profiled at all) with a color profile assigned. So if the app doesn't understand profiles which means it doesn't even bother to look for it the image looks horrible. But that also means that the original camera profile gets stripped during Aperture's ingest? Or the export Aperture process strips it?

This is confusing, but to me it all sounds like somewhere in preferences is a switch which will keep the original profile intact. Mind you, the export could still strip it.

When you say colors are burnt-in, isn't this the differences between a profile being assigned or converted like I know it from PC CS2? I don't have PC CS2 on hand, but I believe these are two separate options.

Regards

Marek

 

[V10]

Hi Brian,

it starts making sense now. So what Aperture does is basically
exporting a flat file (not profiled at all) with a color profile
assigned. So if the app doesn't understand profiles which means it
doesn't even bother to look for it the image looks horrible. But
that also means that the original camera profile gets stripped
during Aperture's ingest? Or the export Aperture process strips it?

Correct, in my case the "Adobe 1998" profile gets replaced with "Color LCD". There is an option on export to use the original profile that was attached to the image by the camera (or the input device), typically sRGB, but Adobe 1998 is also used.

This is confusing, but to me it all sounds like somewhere in
preferences is a switch which will keep the original profile
intact. Mind you, the export could still strip it.

When you say colors are burnt-in, isn't this the differences
between a profile being assigned or converted like I know it from
PC CS2? I don't have PC CS2 on hand, but I believe these are two
separate options.

Yeah when I say burnt in, you'd take the original image, take the profile and do the conversion so when the image comes out it looks like you want, but doesn't require a profile to get it there.

Regards

Marek

--
Brian

 

[V10]

But
that also means that the original camera profile gets stripped
during Aperture's ingest? Or the export Aperture process strips it?

Aperture always uses the profile that is attached to the image when it comes in since it never modifies the original file, but you can replace the profile on export.

--
Brian

 

[mxs]

So the conclusion is that Aperture cannot convert the exported file into a specific color profile? It can only export a file with assigned profile??

If that is true that certainly makes it on a list of issues for me. Are you sure you cannot somewhere Aperture control whether the image is profiled and not only profile assigned?

Regards

Marek