This is in fact normal behavior for the new generation of wide-gamut monitors, which are capable of displaying a wider range of colors than the traditional sRGB gamut. These monitors are closer to Adobe RGB in their native response (but there should be a setting to restrict it to sRGB if so required).
Only a fully color managed environment – such as Photoshop – will give you the correct colors. Outside Photoshop the embedded profile is ignored, and as a result the image looks oversaturated.
You’ll also need a color managed browser such as Firefox (not IE7).
BTW don’t worry about the profile mismatch dialog. It’s just for information. Use the embedded profile.
Just to clarify the above: Only sRGB-tagged or untagged images will look oversaturated on these monitors.
The current "standard" for circulating images is to convert to sRGB, because they will then, on traditional monitors, look roughly the same when stripped of their profiles in a non-color managed environment.
With the coming of wide-gamut monitors this is no longer so, and it will probably force a wider implementation of color management.
Thanks a bunch for your response!
I’m using Firefox, and it seems to show the same (incorrect) colors as the windows picture viewer. I must say that I’m disappointed that I cannot achieve more "true" colors in every day use of my monitor — such as the image displayed on my background. I also noticed that rebooting my system today showed a message from the gretag macbeth software stating that no monitor profile exists. I wonder if I’m having a problem with the calibration software…
Thanks,
-Jim
I’m using Firefox, and it seems to show the same (incorrect) colors
Color management is off by default in Firefox, and you’ll have to turn it on. Type about:config in the address box, go, and scroll down to gfx.color_management.enabled. If it says "false" under value, change it to "true" (highlight, right-click and "toggle).
As for your calibration, check that nothing else interferes on startup. Adobe Gamma or your video card control panel loader can do that. Type msconfig in the "Run…" box in your start menu and click the Startup tab. Anything associated with your video card can safely be disabled, the driver will still work. In any case you can just re-enable if you should get problems.
Also check in Windows display settings that the correct profile is loaded as default (I don’t remember if this can be done in xp, but in Vista it’s pretty straightforward).
….and of course it doesn’t stop there, because with almost all images on the web untagged, a color managed browser won’t help.
It seems the world is perhaps not quite ready for wide-gamut monitors yet…
I was trying to be a good photographer, and get the IPS monitor. Now I’m wondering if I can return the monitor and get something not as "good", but more usable. Alternatively, I’m looking into replacing my calibration hardware, but I’m not certain that will really help with general usability. (*sigh*)
Thanks for the info!
Thank you! i just changed it to enabled.
Bill
Now I’m wondering if I can return the monitor and get something not as "good", but more usable
Too bad, because I’m sure it’s great for Photoshop work.
See if there’s an sRGB setting somewhere to cripple it for now.
I did see an sRGB setting in the OSD (while I was calibrating). I’ll have to look into that. I’ll let you know what I find out. Thanks.
Interestingly, I found this post by g ballard on the Mac forum:
(…)like I wrote earlier, the Windows operating system Assumes untagged RGB is sRGB, and sRGB is the only RGB target on the internet right now — so the Windows boxes don’t have the problem on the internet or in unmanaged applications (…) I know because I tested mine on Windows Vista and it was good
Here’s the full thread:
<
http://www.adobeforums.com/webx?128@@.59b73214>
Can anyone who actually has a wide-gamut monitor confirm this? I’m thinking of getting one, but trying to figure out whether it’s worthwhile yet.
Freeagent, I just read the thread and it’s pleasing to know that ignorance also flourishes in the Mac Ps forum. Disregard half of what G Ballard posts.
Do tag your images destined to the Web (or indeed any output device) with the appropriate ICC profile. For the web that would mostly be sRGB.
I use both a a Dell wide-gamut monitor and Windows. I do not care in the slightest how Windows interprets images; instead I care about the applications I use to view my images. On a wide-gamut monitor (mine approximates AdobeRGB) you need to use fully colour managed applications to view your images. (Most apps only partially manage colour or are entirely ignorant.)
If you posses a wide-gamut monitor and view an sRGB tagged image in an unmanaged app then the image will appear over saturated. (Colour icons on the Windows desktop also appear gaudy — but you soon get used to that).
If you convert images to sRGB in Ps and then save them without a profile, and then view them on an sRGB gamut monitor (calibrated, of course), and use a unmanaged application, then your images should appear OK. This is the world that Ballard and most users inhabit.
But substitute a wide-gamunt monitor into the scenario then suddenly the image appears different. (The extra saturation punch might actually be pleasing!)
Here’s some interesting reading: from a dpreview forum <
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1006&me ssage=28355538>.
My conclusion is that owning a wide gamut monitor is a pain right now. I hope this will change, but I don’t expect it to change soon. At least the Vista picture viewer is color correct (from what I’ve read — I have not confirmed that). This is not a help for me on XP. Although I have good image editor software, I often preview images using the system picture viewer. That option is now lost to me. Do I adjust my workflow habits, or simply return the monitor? The jury is still out..
Two Windows apps that are fully colour managed are Firefox 3 (with gfx.color_management.enabled set to true in the about:config adress); and Fast Picture Viewer. Both free.
Wolf: I think that ThumbsPlus Pro (latest iteration – 7.0 SP1?) is also fully colour managed.
Wolf,
That’s what I thought, and what g ballard said didn’t make any logical sense to me. Thanks for confirming my suspicion. Normally I take whatever he says as the gospel truth, because it usually is.
So for everyday use, the problem seems to be the untagged images on the web. For all tagged images you should be well covered by color management.
Gary B. is normally a good source of colour management knowledge and has put a lot of valuable information in his web site; but we all make mistakes.
Even Adobe engineers! 😉
After a week of use, I’m going to return the LP2475w monitor. The wide gamut issues I can work around. However, there are some other issues with the monitor. There is light fall off around the edges (in particular, the right edge). There is also a significant "warm up" time. This is my #1 reason for the return. The monitor takes a while to reach full brightness, and the level of change is very significant.
With that in mind, I’m now looking for another 24" monitor. Something less troublesome. 🙂 Can anyone recommend a decent 24" monitor less than $900 or so? I’m hoping to do some photo editing as well as gaming.
Thanks again!
-Jim
Look at the Eizo range. I love my Eizo!
Most wide gamut monitors, like Eizo ( I love mine too ), will have several modes including sRGB so that you can choose between different gamuts so you will not get that over saturated look. When doing ‘Real’ colour work for print you will be amazed by the accuracy of the 97 – 100% aRGB gamut space these monitor can display.
For web simply configure the screen, or press the mode button, to view sRGB – job done.
Also Eizo has zero time warm up, no colour shift and the best backlight coverage I’ve ever seen…if you got the dough – there’s only one choice.
John and Chris,
Thanks for the info on Eizo. I’m guessing that any of their 24" models will be well out of my price range (about $900 or less). I might be willing to go a little higher,but I’m guessing the Eizos will be much higher. 🙁
Thanks again,
-Jim
I only have a 21" model. They get much pricier at 24".
I also have a smaller Dell, which is very good; they do a 24" at a reasonable price.
I heard that certain Dell models were okay. I have a ton of Dell equipment, but we (my wife and I) are now boycotting Dell due to some recent support troubles. I’ve heard that some NEC’s are good. I might have to move my price point up a few hundred to get a 24" display that will make me truly happy…
NEC’s are a good choice too
Thanks for the info on the NEC 2490WUXi! That might be just the ticket for me! 🙂
Have a look at the NEC 2690WUXi as well – a few bucks more and a slightly bigger screen with the same resolution, but a greater colour gamut of 97% Adobe RGB vs 76% Adobe RGB.
….another vote for the NEC 2690WUXi from me…
Anthony.
Thanks for the scoop on the 2690. After my recent experience with a wide gamut monitor, I will wait until such things have better OS support. I would recommend the same for anyone else that is a hobby photographer, and uses the computer for other things besides image processing. I *am* planning on ordering the 2490.
BTW, I really appreciate everyone’s valuable comments and patient assistance. Thanks!!
I just received my NEC 2490WUXi, and it’s beautiful!
Thanks again everyone, and Happy Holidays!
-Jim
