Square Butte is about 7 miles from where I live and right beside the road. I've literally driven past it over a thousand times on trips to Page and elsewhere. I've often thought it might be worth a photo, and have tried several times, but just didn't get the light to make it work. Then one morning in mid-September this year I woke up, looked out, and saw a mostly clear eastern sky and clouds in the west. This was an ideal combo for the image I had in mind, so I quickly drove out, took about 20 minutes worth of pictures, and came home and went to work.
I've posted the exact same image below with one difference. This first image has had the colors converted to sRGB
and the sRGB color profile embedded in the image file. The second image, (the one below) also has the colors converted to sRGB, but there is no embedded color profile.
Depending on your monitor and browser, these two images may look the same or they may look different. Based on my observations on my own computer, this is the recommendation for viewing this image in order to see it as I do.
If you're using a wide-gamut monitor, then viewing it in the Firefox 3.6 browser (or Safari) will show the image the same way I see it.
If you're using a standard sRGB monitor, then viewing it in Internet Explorer 8 will show the image the same way I see it.
I attempt discuss the different combination of browsers, monitors, and embedded profiles in
this post on the discussion forum.
As always, I'd be interested in your impressions and recommendations regarding this image. I would also be interested in know which browser (FF, IE, Safari) and which type of monitor you viewing the image with (wide-gamut or sRGB) and how the two images look to you to help me better understand if my own observations are correct. Thanks.
Note: Based on the responses so far, I should mention that if you see a difference between the images, it should be pretty dramatic. At least it is on both my monitors. It's not subtle. The two images look obviously different when there is a difference.
Canon 5d2, 28-200 lens.
Follow-up: Thanks for all the help on monitor colors issue, and the thoughtful comments on the image. Mark Stahlke's post on checking the color management settings in Firefox's about:config settings did the trick. Now both the images on Firefox look identical too, and correct for the way I want the image to be seen. It's all described below. My only remaining issue is that IE on the wide-gamut monitor still has over-saturated colors, but that's really not an issue since I don't use IE much. I've gone back and looked at several others' images that previously looked over-saturated, and they're all fine now. Feels great to have sense that what I'm seeing on my monitor now matches what the photographer wants me to see.
Comments
47 commentsthe contrast just perfect
i like it a lot
very well done Tony
I'm viewing this on a Dell HD monitor , not the greatest monitor, Thru IE8, I noticed a slight richer color in the first one, not much though. Love the colors in this.
I have great ocean scenery near home ( Long Beach ) but not the desert like you do. Congrats on finally capturing a familiar local "icon" under stellar light. Your mind must be constantly "on" in order to recognize conditions were perfect to match with what is usually just a "ho-hum" seen this about every day scene. I am using the latest version of Mozilla (Firefox) not sure about the monitor but the images look so close as to be almost identical, although the first seems a hair richer and a shade darker in the sky. Reduces choosing to a matter of personal taste.
Paul
I believe that the colors are more vibrant in the second image.
I'm kind of a novice regarding monitor/browser types; so I can't
help you there.
They both appear the same to me with FF 3.6 on an sRGB monitor.
Mel-
I am using a standard monitor, and your observation is correct Tony. The second image is more saturated.
I am getting exactly the conditions you just stated. The first one is slightly lighter and the second has more saturation which seems to lend just a smidge more contrast as well. I am viewing this on an old sRGB monitor and with IE.
I think it's fantastic how the clouds elope on top of the butte. The saturation might be a little high for me in the sky.
I'm using firefox and both photos show up nicely without differences.
I'm really glad you are addressing this topic about monitors and color profiles. This drove me absolutely crazy when I first started posting images on the web. Actually it still drives me crazy, because my images don't look right on certain websites when viewed on my wide gamut monitor.
Here are my observations of the images. I use a wide gamut NEC P221W calibrated monitor.
Firefox 3.6.10 - Image 2 is definitely much more saturated and slightly brighter
IE 8 - The images are nearly identical and appear to look the same as Image 2 viewed in FF/Safari (ie more saturated)
Safari 4.0.4 - Same as FF. Image 2 has more saturation.
This is what I'd expect with a standard monitor and IE. However, with FF I'd expect a difference?
Hmm, standard office PC would suggest standard (non-wide-gamut) monitor. In this case both images should look the same on IE.
We have the same monitor, Scott, and get the same results. Embedded profile image looks good in FF and image with no embedded profile is too saturated. Both images are too saturated in IE.
I am viewing the image on Linux-based FF 3.6 with an sRGB monitor. The colors display the same in both images.
With IE, there should be no difference between the two images regardless of which type of monitor is used for viewing, but with FF, there should always be a difference. So interesting that the results are not as expected, at least not all the time.
Maybe not as intriguing as your other works, but a master piece anyway. The sky is making all the difference here. Always nice to admire your images and to read your insightful technical descriptions, Tony!
I'm one of the people who sees no difference. Here are my settings:
gfx.color_management.mode user set 1
gfx.color_management.rendering_intent default 0
gfx.color_management.display_profile default (blank)
I found a web page that appears to have a good description of the possible values for these settings.
That is so helpful, Mark. My gfx.color_management.mode is set to 2 instead of 1. That's listed as the default. Here's the line:
gfx.color_management.mode;2
According to the link you sent, a setting of 2 means "Enable color management for tagged graphics only. (Default)" Am going to experiment with a setting of "1" and see what happens.
Back shortly.
OK, that really made a big, big difference. With gfx.color_management.mode set to "1" instead of "2" both images now look the same in my Firefox browser too.
However, they do NOT look the same in Firefox and Internet Explorer. Nor do they look the same on the wide-gamut and the sRGB monitors. Firefox on the wide-gamut is correct for how the image is supposed to look. IE on the sRGB monitor is also correct. However, Firefox on the sRGB monitor is under-saturated. IE on the wide-gamut monitor is over-saturated. At least that's my impression, though it's not as dramatic as it was before I changed the Firefox setting. And this may be totally normal. The sRGB CRT is not as vivid as the wide-gamut LCD, so it would make sense that an image on it in FF would look under-saturated. And since Internet Explorer only displays sRGB colors, opening it on the wide-gamut monitor, which displays 95% of Adobe RGB color space, would be like opening an sRGB image in Photoshop without converting it to the Adobe RGB color space. In both cases, the sRGB image will be over-saturated in the larger color space. Anyway, that's my current thought on this.
At least I can understand now how people see the images the same in Firefox and can replicate that on my system. I'm also of the mind now that the only combination that will give inaccurate results is Internet Explorer on a wide-gamut monitor, with over-saturation being the result. The previous over-saturation I was experiencing with Firefox and untagged images seems to have resolved with the change in the color management setting in Firefox.
Using the latest version of FF, they both look the same on my old NEC sRGB monitor.
Stellar image as usual from you and its no surprise you processing looks spot on. I have an older (not too old)
iMac. There isn't a huge difference but I do notice the second version to be slightly more saturated especially in the purple/magenta area above the butte and the reddish striations in the rock. Interesting observation for sure.
You get my email?
Great shot, love it
I have a good quality LCD monitor (HP LP2465). I don't know if it is wide gamut or sRGB. I viewd both of your images in FF and in IE8. I saw no differences. All four looked pretty much identical. Might help if they were side by side, but there were no obvious differences in saturation.
After reading your general discussion post, I reckoned that I would be able to determine whether my monito was sRGB or wide-gamut, but was not able to.
BTW your picture has wonderful complementary colors that seem to be satureated just the right amount. Terrific.
I am on FF, 3.6.10 and see a difference between the two. It is not a dramatic difference, but noticeable. I am also on a really cheap Dell at work with a lousy video card.
Regarding the two different images, I see no difference in either image on Google Chrome, IE 7, FF 3.0.19, or Safari 3.2 on a Lacie photon 20 vision II monitor.
Looking at the same image on my home computer, MacPro with wide gamut monitor, FF 3.6.8, there is a huge difference between the images. The image w/o the profile is far more saturated.
The second photo is more saturated and has more contrast. I´m on a calibrated high end wide-gamut lcd, using the las version of Safari, so everything is as it should be.
I'm viewing on a Mac, calibrated (Spyder 3) Apple Cinema display, using Safari, and cannot discern any noticeable difference between the two images.
Chris
Lovely colorful image!
I am on Safari 5.0.2 and see no difference.
the first one fixes more with my taste
I am using a Dell 27" wide-gamut display. In FF 3.6.10 with color management enabled, the second image is obviously more saturated (especially the reds) than the first. In IE 6.0.2, both images look identical (and identical to the second image as viewed in FF). Hope this helps.
Both images look identical on my hp2310m.