Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Guest
Forums  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 21 Dec 2013 (Saturday) 06:18
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

What happened here?

 
travisvwright
Goldmember
Avatar
2,057 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 214
Joined Feb 2013
Location: NC
     
Dec 21, 2013 06:18 |  #1

I'm taking weekly pictures of my wife's pregnant belly. For most of it I was using DPP to get from CR2 to Jpg then editing the jpg with Gimp and uploading. Everything looked great. This week decided I was good enough in LightRoom 5 to do the editing then export a Tiff to Gimp then use LR again to convert the tiff to websized JPG. Things did not look great.

On the left is the picture as it appears on my computer. On the right is the identical file after being uploaded.

I assume it's some sort of sRGB to AdobePhotoRGB or something. But other pictures that were just edited with LR5 can be uploaded with no change. So maybe not.

IMAGE: https://photography-on-the.net/forum/images/hostedphotos_lq/2013/12/3/LQ_671649.jpg
Image hosted by forum (671649) © travisvwright [SHARE LINK]
THIS IS A LOW QUALITY PREVIEW. Please log in to see the good quality stuff.

I come here for your expert opinion. Please do not hesitate to critique or edit.
70D, 6D, Canon 135, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 100 2.8 Macro, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 10-18 4.5 STM

Franklin NC Photographer Travis Wright (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tzalman
Fatal attraction.
Avatar
13,497 posts
Likes: 213
Joined Apr 2005
Location: Gesher Haziv, Israel
     
Dec 21, 2013 06:42 |  #2

I assume it's some sort of sRGB to AdobePhotoRGB or something.

I don't know what programs those are, the viewer and the web browser. And it's not clear in what space the jpg was exported. And finally, I don't know what kind of monitor you have and whether it is calibrated/profiled.
But, the capture on the left looks like the image is either displayed in a color managed application or is appropriate for the monitor (sRGB on regular monitor, Adobe RGB on wide gamut monitor) and therefore doesn't need color management. The screen cap on the right looks like an sRGB image on a wide gamut monitor in an application without color management.


Elie / אלי

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
frugivore
Goldmember
3,089 posts
Gallery: 11 photos
Likes: 118
Joined Aug 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
     
Dec 21, 2013 06:47 |  #3

Have you tried opening the image in Firefox instead? I know that Chrome did have some color management issues earlier.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
travisvwright
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
2,057 posts
Gallery: 21 photos
Likes: 214
Joined Feb 2013
Location: NC
     
Dec 21, 2013 12:51 |  #4

The thing is if I open the file in Chrome it looks fine it's only after it's been uploaded to a wordpress site that it shows with the green tint. As a test though I exported it with a Convert to sRGB and uploaded that and it looks just fine.


I come here for your expert opinion. Please do not hesitate to critique or edit.
70D, 6D, Canon 135, Tamron 28-75 2.8, Tamron 70-200 2.8 VC, Canon 50 1.4, Canon 100 2.8 Macro, Canon 85 1.8, Canon 10-18 4.5 STM

Franklin NC Photographer Travis Wright (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Kolor-Pikker
Goldmember
2,790 posts
Likes: 59
Joined Aug 2009
Location: Moscow
     
Dec 21, 2013 13:18 |  #5

travisvwright wrote in post #16545041 (external link)
The thing is if I open the file in Chrome it looks fine it's only after it's been uploaded to a wordpress site that it shows with the green tint. As a test though I exported it with a Convert to sRGB and uploaded that and it looks just fine.

Yeah, it's a color space issue that comes up now and then, so usually you'd never upload anything other than sRGB online, as there isn't much reason to do so.

Many devices still don't render 100% sRGB spectrum on their displays (iPad mini is 68% sRGB), and even the best photo monitors are 97% AdobeRGB, so in almost all cases the image you see when looking at an ARGB image is a conversion that your web browser or other application does on the fly to fit your screen's gamut. When that process isn't handled properly, you get that dark/green/bland look as per your example, also Chrome is notorious for poor color space handling.


5DmkII | 24-70 f/2.8L II | Pentax 645Z | 55/2.8 SDM | 120/4 Macro | 150/2.8 IF
I acquired an expensive camera so I can hang out in forums, annoy wedding photographers during formals and look down on P&S users... all the while telling people it's the photographer, not the camera.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 570
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Dec 21, 2013 17:19 |  #6

My take is, unless you are a professional at photo processing and providing to clients who need the "best", it may not be particularly useful to have the "best" monitors and such. When I pick out a monitor, I look at the display to ensure that it will properly show the "stuff", then I lower the brightness.

From there, though, yeah, pay attention to things like the color space. There is indeed a difference between showing an image on the Web between sRGB, AdobeRGB and the Lightroom built-in ProPhotoRGB/MelissaRGB​.

Your color-managed photo apps may not show the difference, but a Web browser will tend to unless it's specifically color-managed. And if you want other people to view it online, I can pretty much guarantee unsatisfactory results! That's why we advise folks to only use sRGB for Web-posting!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links (only for non-logged)

1,073 views & 0 likes for this thread, 5 members have posted to it.
What happened here?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Forums   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset   •  Home

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.58forum software
version 2.58 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ealarcon
1117 guests, 171 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.