Do web jpegs require embedded ICC?

[makman]

In Photoshop CS, there is a checkbox for the ICC profile when you save for web. Should this be checked?

Thanks
Mitch

[maderito]

You don't need to save ICC profiles to have your images show up on the web. Web images are assumed to be sRGB (unless otherwise tagged) and will be displayed as such.

Some suggest that you convert your image to the sRGB color space (if it's in another - e.g. Adobe RGB) before putting it on the web. In Photoshop, Image->Mode->Convert Profile.

For info on what including the ICC profile with the image accomplishes (in addition to adding about 2K to the file size), see:

http://users.rcn.com/ccowens/browser_color/test.html

I'd be interested if anyone here does web development regularly and their thoughts on including ICC profiles - either in the images directly on indirectly via HTML attributes.

[atleypnorth]

I'd be interested if anyone here does web development regularly and their thoughts on including ICC profiles - either in the images directly on indirectly via HTML attributes.

I think that XP will take notice of embedded ICC profiles in images when displaying.

Also there is a nice bug that kills the rendering engine in explorer to do with 'Colorspace' setting in the EXIF data ...

I dont beleive there is anything that will utilise ICC profiles that are somehow referred to by HTML attributes.

I would just go for converting to sRGB before posting on the web if you really want to

[Jesper]

I'd be interested if anyone here does web development regularly and their thoughts on including ICC profiles - either in the images directly on indirectly via HTML attributes.

I think that XP will take notice of embedded ICC profiles in images when displaying.

No, it does not. The built-in image viewer of Windows XP is not colour management aware, and Internet Explorer also isn't. On Windows, the default colour space is sRGB, so you should convert images to sRGB before putting them on the web.

[maderito]

I think that XP will take notice of embedded ICC profiles in images when displaying.

No, it does not. The built-in image viewer of Windows XP is not colour management aware, and Internet Explorer also isn't. On Windows, the default colour space is sRGB, so you should convert images to sRGB before putting them on the web.

I'm surprised and disappointed by this news, especially since the Windows operating system provides color management capability via ICM. I would think that graphics intensive applications - like web browsers - would have implemented basic color management by now. I guess it's easier to force everyone to "submit" web images within the sRGB color space specification. :?

[atleypnorth]

well i think i was kind of right on one part and wrong on the other ...

have a look at http://www.ekdahl.org/kurs/colormanage.htm

and from that page there is a link to http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microsoft.com:80/support/kb/articles/q182/4/84.asp&NoWebContent=1

So looks like embedded profiles are supported and HTML tags can be used , at least with IE...

Was sure that IE did something with profiles otherwise wouldnt of seen the problems that I have seen with it and colorspace info in images

[maderito]

well i think i was kind of right on one part and wrong on the other ...

have a look at http://www.ekdahl.org/kurs/colormanage.htm

and from that page there is a link to http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=http://support.microsoft.com:80/support/kb/articles/q182/4/84.asp&NoWebContent=1

So looks like embedded profiles are supported and HTML tags can be used , at least with IE...

Was sure that IE did something with profiles otherwise wouldnt of seen the problems that I have seen with it and colorspace info in images
Uh...I am more confused than ever.

PCs and MACs have operating systems capable of color management (ICM and ColorSync). How web browsers interact with operating system color management, if at all, remains a mystery to me. Somebody in the know should rescue this thread. . . :?

[atleypnorth]

Uh...I am more confused than ever.

PCs and MACs have operating systems capable of color management (ICM and ColorSync). How web browsers interact with operating system color management, if at all, remains a mystery to me. Somebody in the know should rescue this thread. . . :?

Well i think in terms of the original questions, no you dont need to include the profile since the image will display anyway :) But would be better to convert it sRGB to make it look better. If you do include the profile it may be used by the browser depending on the OS and browser, and since you cant predict that combination best to just convert it to sRGB anyway.

[John_T]

The web is cross platform, or even no platform, and the common color space is sRGB. It is principly a question of monitors being calibrated to sRGB, ie. 6500K and gamma 2.2, for viewers to see images correctly, and in that sense, the same.

So it is a factor of sRGB color space images being placed or posted on the web and then anyone viewing on a sRGB calibrated monitor sees the image correctly and the same. There is no profiling for this. The majority of images are sRGB straight out of the camera = no need to change anything. In cases where the camera, a Canon 10D for example, is set in camera to Adobe RGB (aRGB), then it is advisable to convert the aRGB image to sRGB while saving for web. 99% of the time you don't need to do anything to your image, other than perhaps resizing, to post to web.

When outputting to print or other output medium, then perhaps you must use a profile if, for example, you are printing on a paper that is not covered by your printer driver dialog.

It's easy to get confused in color management, but usually less is more, except for calibrating your monitor, which is a must, unless you are a masochist.