Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: A Windows Explorer Color Management Anomaly  (Read 1828 times)
xpatUSA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« on: May 31, 2013, 09:37:14 AM »
ReplyReply

I thought I was beginning to get it . . downloaded ICC's mis-profiled V4 and V2 mountain images to check my apps for V4 and V2 compliance. Extracted their profiles to add to a simple color patch RGBYMC. Sure enough, some apps showed true colors, some did not. Then I noticed something quite odd about Windows Explorer - it showed some thumbnails in true color and some not, even though they had the same embedded profile!



Yep. At right, upper and lower images have Adobe 1998 RGB embedded and show more or less correctly, as one might expect.

At left, the upper and lower images both have ICC's "GBR" profile embedded, which reverses the colors. Yet the upper image shows correctly while the lower is obviously incorrect at BRGMCY.

Thank you Microsoft for making our life so interesting by providing a Windows Explorer which is apparently both color-managed and not color-managed at the same time. Windows XP Pro, SP3. Embedded profiles verified with ExifToolGUI.

Glurk!
« Last Edit: May 31, 2013, 11:22:25 AM by xpatUSA » Logged

best regards,

Ted
hugowolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 599


« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2013, 08:56:07 PM »
ReplyReply

Are you talking about Windows Explorer or Internet Explorer? Either way, you are looking at a pretty dated apps if you are running XP.

Brian A
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2225



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2013, 09:18:34 PM »
ReplyReply

That's what I was going to say holy smokes man, spend a LITTLE money and get something within the last decade...sheesh.
Logged

xpatUSA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #3 on: June 01, 2013, 12:26:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Thank y'all for your comments.

Not the kind of response I was expecting, to be honest.

Hugo, The title says "Windows Explorer".

kaelaria, I run XP Pro by choice. It serves me well for my purposes.

Perhaps posts on this forum are best made only on the very latest of everything and noobs using simple, outdated stuff should post elsewhere?

Logged

best regards,

Ted
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2225



WWW
« Reply #4 on: June 01, 2013, 12:30:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Poor choice
Logged

xpatUSA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #5 on: June 01, 2013, 12:43:26 AM »
ReplyReply

why?
Logged

best regards,

Ted
Simon Garrett
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 344


« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2013, 02:19:28 AM »
ReplyReply

Windows XP does not implmenent WCS (Windows Color System) but only its more limited predecessor ICM (Image Color Management).  Most Microsoft-provided components in XP were not colour-managed.  For example, the XP "Windows Picture and Fax Viewer" is not colour managed, but the W7/8 equivalent "Windows Photo Viewer" is. 

Even in Windows 7/8, colour management is a bit half-baked.  IE - even IE10 - is not fully colour managed. 

I reckon it's safest to assume that Windows software is generally not colour-managed (except Windows Photo Viewer) but merely provides mechanisms for colour-aware programs to do colour management. 


Logged
xpatUSA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2013, 10:05:54 AM »
ReplyReply

Hello Simon, thanks for a less terse response  Wink

Yes, XP is not the finest as far as color management is concerned and, if I were a real photographer, I would certainly get the latest and greatest of everything. I did download Microsoft's "color" app for the Control Panel and it tells me that XP Pro runs "CMM icm32.dll V5.1", whatever that means.

Windows Picture and Fax viewer on my machine also appears to be half-baked. ICC's V4 sYCC image shows with a green sky but the V2 GBR image shows correctly. Not that I'm really bothered by that - it's just interesting.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2013, 08:43:35 PM by xpatUSA » Logged

best regards,

Ted
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 441


WWW
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2013, 03:00:13 AM »
ReplyReply

Having windows XP color managed for V2 profiles at OS level is actually pretty good for most practical applications. You can always use specific applications if you really need V4 profiles compatibility (not for windows explorer).

Microsoft decided not to support IE9 or newer for Windows XP, but you could use the latest version of Firefox, which does support V4 profiles. Any other color managed application such as LR or Photoshop will work fine with color management (maybe not the latest versions, which are not compatible with XP)

Anyway, regarding V4 profiles, many color experts suggest to stay away from them, since they will give you more troubles than benefits.

Regards.
Logged

xpatUSA
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 293



WWW
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2013, 11:22:34 AM »
ReplyReply

Good information, Francisco, thank you.

I became interested in V4 to try out perceptual rendering on a flower shot which had very saturated colors.

For my normal purposes, I just use standard V2 for my monitor and the web (I don't print).

Thanks again for a clear explanation which reinforces my own decision not to use V4 other than for research.

Logged

best regards,

Ted
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8650



WWW
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2013, 01:23:05 PM »
ReplyReply

I became interested in V4 to try out perceptual rendering on a flower shot which had very saturated colors.

I've yet to find a V4 ICC profile that isn't just a V2 in sheep's clothing. They either do nothing special or depending on the software, just cause problems (gray scum dot, etc).
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
hugowolf
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 599


« Reply #11 on: June 02, 2013, 06:55:13 PM »
ReplyReply

I've yet to find a V4 ICC profile that isn't just a V2 in sheep's clothing. They either do nothing special or depending on the software, just cause problems (gray scum dot, etc).
I have to second this: I have yet to come across a real version 4 ICC profile.

Brian A
Logged
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad