color space issues?

goodoneian · Jul 19, 2008

i recently installed a new copy of vista on my computer, and while looking through my pictures using the windows photo gallery or w/e the standard image browser is, all of my pictures are way over-saturated compared to how they look in photoshop cs3 and my camera's lcd.

does anyone know how to fix this? i know there's been similar questions before but i searched it and couldn't find a good answer:meh:

i can make an example of the images saturation difference if needed

Big Mike · Jul 20, 2008

What color space are the images in, while in Photoshop?

I'd guess that windows is using sRBG but I don't know anything about Vista and it's quirks.

b.t.w. Don't use the camera's LCD to judge color/exposure.

goodoneian · Jul 20, 2008

my color in photoshop is sRGB. i could be wrong though, seeing as i don't exactly know how to check this

and i know, i was just stating that the color of the picture in photoshop was near identical as it was on my lcd.

Garbz · Jul 20, 2008

This is normally the exact opposite of what really happens. It is colour space related but I think from a different side of it. Output space not the working space. Quick questions:

Open a photo in photoshop, click edit -> assign profile. Make sure the source profile is in sRGB, if it's not find a picture that is for testing.

1. Do you have a wide gamut display such as some of the larger Dell LCDs? If so then the over saturation is normal for any photo that is viewed in a program that is not fully colour managed (internet explorer) compared to Photoshop.
2. Is Photoshop giving you the correct output when you open the pictures or is it too over saturated? If this is right then it confirms the above, and you need to use some different software.
3. Do you have any colour correction software even something as simple as playing with the gamma curve of your video card in the control panel? Or something complicated like a LUT loader that runs when windows starts? There are known compatibility issues with those and Vista's colour management.
4. Check the display options in control panel and check to make sure the saturation is set at default.

notelliot · Jul 20, 2008

do you regularly calibrate and profile your monitor(s)?

goodoneian · Jul 20, 2008

1. yes, i have a 24" dell monitor
2. photoshop was set to just RGB 1998. i opened many photos to see if they all said that, which they did.
3. no, i don't have anything running like that. my monitor is set completely default as is the color settings in my video card control panel. i also have no programs set to boot when windows starts.
4. when i go to control panel then color management, the only options i have are adobe sRGB.

lastly, i have not calibrated my monitor.

notelliot · Jul 20, 2008

get on it :mrgreen:.

any colour adjustments you make to your monitor or profiles won't be accurate anyway, until you calibrate. software isn't too expensive. I borrow a friend's Spyder II, and have my eye on this - does monitors, printers, and prints. pretty effin' cool.

goodoneian · Jul 20, 2008

i had a spyder II and actually returned it, because it made my monitor look horrible and all my pictures look completely washed out. and i'm quite savvy with computer software/ hardware so i'm pretty confident i did everything right on it's setup

reg · Jul 20, 2008

goodoneian said:
i had a spyder II and actually returned it, because it made my monitor look horrible and all my pictures look completely washed out. and i'm quite savvy with computer software/ hardware so i'm pretty confident i did everything right on it's setup

You did something wrong, or the particular one was defective. Either way, that's not how it should look and IF you did it all right, then it was defective. But that's a big if.

goodoneian · Jul 20, 2008

well like i said i'm pretty confident in myself that i can follow pretty simple instructions haha. the only thing it appeared to do was up the gamma on my monitor which made it difficult to look at

notelliot · Jul 20, 2008

maybe try another calibration software, or if you trust your eye, calibrate manually. either way, you're going to need to calibrate.

reg · Jul 20, 2008

I still refuse to believe that if all the Spyder did was up the gamma on his monitor, that a different calibration software would make the difference.

It was either:
* user error
* defective product

Sandspur · Jul 20, 2008

I hate to sound cynical here - but Microsoft is not exactly the company I would defer to in matters of image management, so isn't it possible that - since your images look fine on the LCD and in Photoshop - this problem has something to do with the MS windows Photo Gallery, and may not in fact be a real problem at all?

Sure, monitor calibration is important. But calibrating a monitor is not going to change the relative differences you've asked about.

I say stop using the damn MS crap and rely on PS for your judgement about your images.

(Full disclosure: I'm a Mac person so I obviously believe that anything either Microsoft or conventional PC related is sub-standard. But I Do NOT think your problem is related to either the quality of your images or the calibration of your monitor.)

goodoneian · Jul 20, 2008

Sandspur said:
I hate to sound cynical here - but Microsoft is not exactly the company I would defer to in matters of image management, so isn't it possible that - since your images look fine on the LCD and in Photoshop - this problem has something to do with the MS windows Photo Gallery, and may not in fact be a real problem at all?

Sure, monitor calibration is important. But calibrating a monitor is not going to change the relative differences you've asked about.

I say stop using the damn MS crap and rely on PS for your judgement about your images.

(Full disclosure: I'm a Mac person so I obviously believe that anything either Microsoft or conventional PC related is sub-standard. But I Do NOT think your problem is related to either the quality of your images or the calibration of your monitor.)

yes, i agree with the fact that i don't think it's my monitor color or calibration that's making the images look weird but instead its windows.

if i had screenshots of what adjustments the spyder made to my monitor i would show everyone, but unfortunately i don't

Garbz · Jul 22, 2008

notelliot said:
get on it :mrgreen:.

any colour adjustments you make to your monitor or profiles won't be accurate anyway, until you calibrate. software isn't too expensive. I borrow a friend's Spyder II, and have my eye on this - does monitors, printers, and prints. pretty effin' cool.

Settle down there, he'll get to the calibration in due time. The reality is modern monitors are rather good out of the factory so if what is happening is what I think is happening then calibrating won't fix it, and using a Spyder II will royally screw it up.

goodoneian final question to you. Your 24" monitor, does it have a W in the product name like any of the following:
Dell E248WFP with 92% NTSC gamut coverage? or the
Dell E2408WFP with 110% NTSC gamut coverage?

If not stop reading now.

If so your screen is a wide gamut display, meaning it displays a more richer set of primaries than standard displays. Windows expects certain colour primaries based on the sRGB profile. Since these displays have a larger gamut all colours appear more saturated or even shifted towards one of the primaries. What you need to do:
1. Download the ICC profile or drivers from the dell website.
2. Make sure that the correct ICC profile for your monitor is set in windows control panel.
3. Use fully colour managed programs, that is programs that recognise your destination monitor profile. Photoshop does this automatically. Firefox 3.0 does this but needs to be enabled http://joi.ito.com/weblog/2008/06/21/firefox-3-and-c.html and your profile selected. A colour managed image viewer is for example AcdSee Pro 2.0. again you need to enable it and select your monitor profile.

If you decide to calibrate do NOT use the SpyderII. Eizo NEC and others actively state this in their manuals that the Spyder II does not support a wide gamut display. Dell would too if they knew the first thing about customers instead of making useless display that looks good on paper and selling them to people who have no idea how to make things look normal. Consider the spyder 3 or the iOne display 2 from x-rite or gretagmacbeth which support these displays.