Arggh Curse You Photobucket

[dmanning11]

Over the past month I have been having caching issues with photobucket and desaturation issues as well.
Maybe its a colour space issue, but regardless I have had enough of Photobucket destroying all my post processing efforts

What is the best website for hosting photo's for forums and the like that best represents the original photo?

 

[Alex_B]

some personal webspace where you simply upload via ftp would be best I guess.

 

[Overread13 1]

Desaturation is most likely not photobucket at all. It's going to be your colourspace and honestly it won't matter what service you use online. Even if you host the photos yourself you'll still get the desaturation problem because its an issue with your browsing software. Not all browsers are colourspace aware and as such you have to use sRGB for online display.

Edit in whatever colourspace you want, but once you've edited a photo to your taste you should then save 2 versions. One being a normal version, the second being one for the net where you can resize (and sharpen after) for display online and also where you can change the colourspace so that it will display online properly.

 

[KmH]

I have been using Photobucket for years - with zero issues.

 

[Garbz]

Many sites will strip out the ICC profiles from the images when you upload. Even with a colour managed browser the resulting image will appear desaturated. You NEED to convert everything to sRGB before you upload to the web.
Better still, if you don't have a wide gamut monitor and don't print anything, set CameraRAW, Lightroom, or whatever you use to start off the editing process to use sRGB from the start since you're not getting any benefit from a wider colour space. You'll instantly avoid a lot of headaches.

some personal webspace where you simply upload via ftp would be best I guess.

You're masking a problem. If there's colour space issues on photobucket the result will be that if dmanning11 is using a colour managed browser he'll think everything is ok, then Joe Average comes along and will think that he takes horrendous desaturated images.

 

[dmanning11]

Thanks a million everyone it was my Adobe RGB colour space all along, I have set my camera and editing software to sRGB and everything looks good on the web now.
Now does anyone know how I can batch convert the colour space on 2000 RAW images?

 

[KmH]

Now does anyone know how I can batch convert the colour space on 2000 RAW images?

Using what image editing software?

 

[Ysarex83 77]

Thanks a million everyone it was my Adobe RGB colour space all along, I have set my camera and editing software to sRGB and everything looks good on the web now.
Now does anyone know how I can batch convert the colour space on 2000 RAW images?

Raw images don't have a color space. Color space is specifically an issue with RGB images. When a raw file is converted to an RGB photo the color space is assigned by the raw conversion software.

Joe

 

[dmanning11]

Thanks a million everyone it was my Adobe RGB colour space all along, I have set my camera and editing software to sRGB and everything looks good on the web now.
Now does anyone know how I can batch convert the colour space on 2000 RAW images?

Raw images don't have a color space. Color space is specifically an issue with RGB images. When a raw file is converted to an RGB photo the color space is assigned by the raw conversion software.

Joe

Well I was using Adobe Photoshop CS5 and it had a setting to match the colourspace set by the camera when converting to other formats, i have changed this to default to sRGB.
My camera also had a setting for colour space with a number of options, i had this set as Adobe RGB, and I have now changed it to sRGB, my Sony image converter software that does batch processing was also set to match the colourspace set by the camera, and I have changed this to default to sRGB.

All my RAW pics have a colour space setting and detail saved in their meta data as provided by the camera, if RAW dont use it why is it there?

 

[MLeeK]

Photobucket is not color managed. If you are viewing in Firefox it will be fairly accurate. Make sure you resize your images before uploading so that their software isn't changing your image at all.
If you don't want that problem? Use Flickr. It's color managed.

 

[Ysarex83 77]

Thanks a million everyone it was my Adobe RGB colour space all along, I have set my camera and editing software to sRGB and everything looks good on the web now.
Now does anyone know how I can batch convert the colour space on 2000 RAW images?

Raw images don't have a color space. Color space is specifically an issue with RGB images. When a raw file is converted to an RGB photo the color space is assigned by the raw conversion software.

Joe

Well I was using Adobe Photoshop CS5 and it had a setting to match the colourspace set by the camera when converting to other formats, i have changed this to default to sRGB.
My camera also had a setting for colour space with a number of options, i had this set as Adobe RGB, and I have now changed it to sRGB, my Sony image converter software that does batch processing was also set to match the colourspace set by the camera, and I have changed this to default to sRGB.

All my RAW pics have a colour space setting and detail saved in their meta data as provided by the camera, if RAW dont use it why is it there?

It's there for your camera processed JPEGs and it may be there for the conversion software as an available option so that the converter will default to set the same color space that was set on the camera. But you can't assign a color space to a raw file. At the time the raw file is converted to RGB a color space must be assigned to the RGB file. This is an operation applied to the RGB file by the conversion software. A color space is used to define the specific color indicated by the RGB numerical values in the RGB file. No such RGB values exist in the raw file and so a color space is meaningless to the raw file -- it literally can't have one.

Joe

 

[Ysarex83 77]

Photobucket is not color managed. If you are viewing in Firefox it will be fairly accurate. Make sure you resize your images before uploading so that their software isn't changing your image at all.
If you don't want that problem? Use Flickr. It's color managed.

Flickr and Photobucket are no different if you upload a file that is compliant with their size requirements. Photobucket will not strip off the ICC profile of an uploaded file. It does not alter the file in any way unless you upload an oversize file that Photobucket then has to resize. It's not really about color management, it's about leaving the embedded ICC profile in place. Many of the image hosting sites will resize an image that exceeds their requirements and then not re-assign the ICC profile.

Joe