EXTREME Overclocking Forums
Home | Reviews | Forums | Downloads | $ EXTREME Deals $ | RealTime Pricing | Free Magazines | Gear | Folding Stats Newsletter | Contact Us


Go Back   EXTREME Overclocking Forums > General Hardware & Peripherals > Digital Cameras, Camcorders, & Web Cams

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-18-2007, 03:38 PM   #1
repoman
You have my Axe!
Senior Member
 
repoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,788
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Photoshop color different from Windows Pic Viewer color

I've been trying to get some pictures ready with Photoshop to put up here in one of the threads, but I have a weird color related problem. My pictures look better (edit: not sure about better, but I just want consistency) in Windows picture and fax viewer than in photoshop, and since I suck at photoshop, I can't fix them up the right way. Is there any way for me to change a color profile or something in photoshop to help me out?



Same thing but saved with paint

__________________
Antec 300 | MSI 790X-G45 | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 2x4GB GSkill DDR3-1600 | AMD HD5770

Current clock:
-3.6GHz CPU, 1.28v
-2.6GHz CPU-NB, 1.34v
-1600MHz 9-9-9-24-1T RAM, 1.50v

Last.fm
Offline  
Old 06-18-2007, 04:32 PM   #2
vai0
<><
Senior Member
 
vai0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Florida
Age: 24
Posts: 3,005
iTrader: 0 / 0%
thats weird, i would guess the actual picture is the photoshop one and stupid windows pic viewer changes it. The eyes look totally different
Offline  
Old 06-18-2007, 09:09 PM   #3
repoman
You have my Axe!
Senior Member
 
repoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,788
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Well, I also just checked it with Microsoft Office Picture Manager (only other thing that can open it on my computer) and it looks the same as in the pic viewer.

Here's your internet browser's rendition of the picture -



Firefox thinks it's the same as pic viewer / microsoft office thing. So photoshop is wrong here - anyone know how to get it to display the colors correctly? Maybe if any of you have time, you could save that big picture and open it in Photoshop.. see how it turns out for you

Additional Comment:

Got it - Photoshop isn't the problem, everything else is

http://photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00IJYv

I can make it look like pic viewer by going to view, proof setup, monitor rgb
__________________
Antec 300 | MSI 790X-G45 | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 2x4GB GSkill DDR3-1600 | AMD HD5770

Current clock:
-3.6GHz CPU, 1.28v
-2.6GHz CPU-NB, 1.34v
-1600MHz 9-9-9-24-1T RAM, 1.50v

Last.fm

Last edited by repoman; 06-18-2007 at 09:09 PM. Reason: Automerged Doublepost
Offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 07:18 AM   #4
Atasuke
Running System Stock
Forum Newbie
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 30
Repoman your operating system is set to use a custom colour profile and photoshop is using its own which is why when you open your images in photoshop they look different or viceversa.

I can't remember exactly how in windows XP but if you go to your display properties, click the "Advanced settings" button then click the "color management" tab then click the "color management" button you should see a window where you can add and choose your colour profile, if you don't want to mess about too much and make things complicated just select the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 ICC colour profile. Make sure you set it as your default colour profile then click ok or apply etc and restart your system. Try opening images now to see how they appear, if they still seem different in photoshop then go to the preferences screen and change the colour profile it uses in there too.
Offline  
Old 06-19-2007, 07:23 PM   #5
repoman
You have my Axe!
Senior Member
 
repoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,788
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atasuke View Post
Repoman your operating system is set to use a custom colour profile and photoshop is using its own which is why when you open your images in photoshop they look different or viceversa.

I can't remember exactly how in windows XP but if you go to your display properties, click the "Advanced settings" button then click the "color management" tab then click the "color management" button you should see a window where you can add and choose your colour profile, if you don't want to mess about too much and make things complicated just select the sRGB IEC61966-2.1 ICC colour profile. Make sure you set it as your default colour profile then click ok or apply etc and restart your system. Try opening images now to see how they appear, if they still seem different in photoshop then go to the preferences screen and change the colour profile it uses in there too.
Yeah that sRGB profile is the default in Photoshop (or maybe it reads that my images are in sRGB).

I did a quick color configure on my monitor today, I read that 9300K color temperature is too blue and that I should use 6500K. I didn't like 6500, so since my monitor (Dell P1130) supports steps of 100K I chose 7500, and then configured gamma with QuickGamma. It doesn't look nasty and yellow anymore, colors look better than ever before with this - black levels are better as well.

I also changed my Canon 350D to use the Adobe RGB profile, since I read it uses a bigger color gamut than sRGB - sRGB was designed for cheaper, low end monitors. And, despite my P1130 being a few years old, it's far from low end, it was $1000 in it's day So now I have to change my Photoshop default to Adobe RGB, at least when I'm editing my own images.
__________________
Antec 300 | MSI 790X-G45 | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 2x4GB GSkill DDR3-1600 | AMD HD5770

Current clock:
-3.6GHz CPU, 1.28v
-2.6GHz CPU-NB, 1.34v
-1600MHz 9-9-9-24-1T RAM, 1.50v

Last.fm
Offline  
Old 06-21-2007, 07:31 PM   #6
jeremy
moo!
Senior Member
 
jeremy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: near philadelphi
Age: 28
Posts: 819
iTrader: 3 / 100%
repo, i work for a professional photographer, he uses 6500K

Levels and curves are your friend .. Ctrl + L .... drag the arrows till its next to the black histogram on both ends.... Ctrl M if you want it brighter..

Then do Image Adjustment, Hue and Saturation, and turn it down if its too red

I also suggest getting a "monitor brightness" enhancer (i dont know what its called) and a wax printer
__________________
I wish someday to go to colledge. - unclutchable
PHP n00b guide
Offline  
Old 06-21-2007, 08:01 PM   #7
repoman
You have my Axe!
Senior Member
 
repoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 2,788
iTrader: 14 / 100%
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeremy View Post
repo, i work for a professional photographer, he uses 6500K

Levels and curves are your friend .. Ctrl + L .... drag the arrows till its next to the black histogram on both ends.... Ctrl M if you want it brighter..

Then do Image Adjustment, Hue and Saturation, and turn it down if its too red

I also suggest getting a "monitor brightness" enhancer (i dont know what its called) and a wax printer
Hey jeremy, thanks for the reply

Yeah I am very familiar with levels and curves - though levels has become useless to me since I got the 350D, as the camera always fills the histogram. Any changes I make will wash out whites or "black out" darker areas.

Curves has also become tough, as the 350D has very good contrast to begin with and I only know how to use curves to enhance contrast in an image. I can play around with it to help with colors but it always ends up looking worse than it did.

Do you think it's OK that I'm using 7500K though? I've already spent like half an hour adjusting my gamma values with quickgamma and don't want to have to do it all over again.
__________________
Antec 300 | MSI 790X-G45 | AMD Phenom II X4 955 | 2x4GB GSkill DDR3-1600 | AMD HD5770

Current clock:
-3.6GHz CPU, 1.28v
-2.6GHz CPU-NB, 1.34v
-1600MHz 9-9-9-24-1T RAM, 1.50v

Last.fm
Offline  
Old 06-21-2007, 09:04 PM   #8
Turtile
Overclocker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Delaware
Age: 27
Posts: 666
iTrader: 0 / 0%
I leave the files in RAW format and I have my color matched to the prints. I just adjusted the monitor so what I see on paper is the same as what I see on the monitor.
Offline  
Old 06-23-2007, 07:07 PM   #9
CybrSlydr
Special Fish?
Moderator
 
CybrSlydr's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Columbus, OH
Age: 32
Posts: 1,743
iTrader: 5 / 100%
IIRC, Adobe RGB mainly only uses more greens and can display colors incorrectly in sRGB format to those who don't use Adobe RGB.

EIDT:
Quote:
As mentioned, 8-bit RGB provides for a total of 16.7 million colors. While that is quite a few, it pales in comparison to 16-bit RGB where there are 281 trillion possible colors. This doesn't give us even more saturated colors beyond the range of 8-bit; it gives us more colors in between each of the established 8-bit colors. So many more in fact that it utterly overwhelms any problem that may have resulted from the wider gamut. While it is always a good idea to do your editing in 16-bit mode, it is even more important when working in a wider gamut color space. After editing, you can optionally convert to 8-bit if needed since no further data loss can occur.
So which is better? As with many things, the answer is, "it depends." You have to step back to ask "better for what?"
If you are posting images on the web, sRGB is clearly better since Adobe RGB images will likely not display correctly. But if you are sending your images to a commercial printer they will prefer Adobe RGB or even CMYK. If you are printing at home, you can generally benefit from the wider gamut of Adobe RGB as well since current desktop printers with expanded ink sets can print colors beyond sRGB.
If you shoot in jpeg, your choice of color space in-camera can be important. If you use sRGB, you will be limited to colors that can be represented in sRGB. Even if you later convert to Adobe RGB, you won't end up with colors that were never captured. If you shoot in Adobe RGB, you'll need to contend with converting to sRGB at least for posting images to the web but you'll still have a master file that has the expanded gamut for other uses. If you shoot in raw, you can defer the choice of color space until you get your images onto your computer, but you generally can't ignore it completely. Many online photo printers deal exclusively in sRGB since that is the lowest common denominator. I'm guessing they have judged that keeping things simple minimizes the customer service and support issues they have to deal with, lowering their costs. But that doesn't mean you have to let them dictate how you shoot. Just be sure to follow their rules and convert things accordingly before you send them images to print.
Working in Adobe RGB can be at least marginally more complicated since so many programs default to sRGB. If you do work in sRGB, you can often ignore at least some aspects of color management and still have images that look acceptable. Working in Adobe RGB requires you to understand more how you are interpreting color throughout your workflow. If you're a regular reader here, you know that I've tried to do my part to help spread understanding in this area. It's not really all that complicated, but it sure can seem that way at first. A bit of time spent on learning about color management can yield much greater control of how your images end up looking.


http://www.earthboundlight.com/photo...gb-debate.html
__________________


phoenix991 - He's in africa, it takes a while for those lions to run the pictures to the internets.
HUSKYFAN23 - It looks like an Asian person broke in and parked a bunch of rice in the garage
imshirazy - You guys gonna impress them with your overclock bench scores?
GoodGuy8705 - I was thinking my giant wiener.
Zollen - This sounds like the setup for the nerdiest pick-up line ever, '...so, can I upload anonymously onto your ftp server?'
Offline  
Sponsored Links:
Closed Thread

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:40 AM.

Copyright 2000 - 2016, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2016, EXTREME Overclocking