-
Posts
-
I’ve uploaded my images in AdobeRGB. After scrutinizing them I see that the online images are dull and muted because of a profile mismatch. I am using ImageMagick for processing which is supposed to take care of the issue with the displayed images, but apparently not.
Has anyone else noticed this or are you uploading in sRGB?
Hey Don – I upload in AdobeRGB as well and definitely did notice it. Now after uploading the images and processing I am downloading the thumbnails and watermarked previews and running them through an action to attach the profile to the image as well as a bit of sharpening and then re-uploading. Added a small bit of work but the images have much more snap now.
Dang, that is a LOT of work. The other question is what if a client downloads an image? Does the image contain the correct profile?
While I was exclusive at iStock, I uploaded JPEGs in AdobeRGB (I’ve always used that as my working space, but used to convert to sRGB as part of the convert to 8 bit, flatten and save as a JPEG for uploading). They were the only site at the time that handled that properly – converting the thumbs to sRGB and I think the XS and S sizes, providing the rest to the customer as AdobeRGB
When I left exclusivity there were too many microstock sites that just didn’t do the right thing in displaying AdobeRGB images, so I switched back to uploading sRGB (and converted all the JPEGs I’d made in my 3 years of exclusivity).
Ideally, a customer could buy a 16 bit layered PSD file in whatever color space they wanted for maximum fidelity, but for most day to day uses, it appears to work well for most customers to have a high resolution sRGB file. The only images where it gave me a hard time when I converted was some very vivid turqouise Caribbean water – because of the differences in the gamuts of the two color spaces.
I’ve downloaded a few of my own images (as part of testing PayPal) and I don’t get any profile warnings from Photoshop (which warns me if an image has no profile), so I think that you’ll get the profile you embedded when you uploaded. The issue is that the thumbs will look bad and possibly discourage buyers. I did test that embedded clipping paths were preserved as well, and they are.
Unless you’re not going to upload to microstock sites, I think that the path of least resistance is to convert to sRGB for uploads…
Bummer.
So the simplest but not the best solution right now is to upload in sRGB.BTW, not sure about all of the other sites, but iStock handles it correctly.
@donland wrote:
I’ve uploaded my images in AdobeRGB. After scrutinizing them I see that the online images are dull and muted because of a profile mismatch. I am using ImageMagick for processing which is supposed to take care of the issue with the displayed images, but apparently not.
Has anyone else noticed this or are you uploading in sRGB?
I’ve started exporting to sRGB for stock and including the profile too. I know that it reduces the colour range but it displays far better in a browser and unfortunately a lot of people are sold on instant eye candy.
So I edit all my stuff in high colour and 32bit where possible but then save down for use on the web. I keep a separate folder for my “Stock” versions so I don’t botch my original edits.
Jo
@donland wrote:
Dang, that is a LOT of work. The other question is what if a client downloads an image? Does the image contain the correct profile?
Not as much extra work as it sounds. Only takes a couple minutes to download the previews from my server, run them through a Photoshop action and reupload. I’m happy with the look and the customer still gets a file in the AdobeRGB colorspace.
To answer your other question, the final downloaded file is tagged with whatever colorspace you uploaded it as, so no problem there. At the time I was also hoping that getting imagick to work was going to fix the preview color issues. It didn’t, but what it does do is preserve all of the metadata in the thumbs and previews. The original processor (can’t think of it’s name right now) stripped all the info out. I remember both you and I had a lot of trouble getting imagick to work but it was still worth it.
I believe AdobeRGB is THE standard in the stock image market so we should probably stick with it.
I’m wondering however if a processing routine or a plugin could be developed to get a customized enhancing of vibrance and sharpness for screen appearance, just like it’s done with Smugmug galleries.
I am using sRGB – on the odd occasion when I have uploaded in AdobeRGB the upload failed – but that was a few months ago
http://kerioakimaging.com - trying to reopen
http://nail-art-at.kerioak.com - Art and Nail ArtThanks CC.
I’m in the process of doing the same.
Downloaded all the previews via FTP and am resetting the AdobeRGB profile to them for the browsers to pick up.
Unfortunately Imagmagick is still stripping the information out 🙁 so if I want to upload AdobeRGB I’ll have to do this.On another note…. I have the same issue with SS. Hard to believe in this day and age they simply drop the color profile off the files. I’ll probably do all new uploads there in sRGB. I have to go look and see which other sites handle it correctly and which need sRGB.
@redneck wrote:
I believe AdobeRGB is THE standard in the stock image market so we should probably stick with it.
I am sold on AdobeRGB, but not on the notion that it is the standard – all the micros other than iStock handle only sRGB. Macro agencies may have different standards, but honestly if the micros have thrived on sRGB, I think we can manage.
Preserving the profile (if you upload in Adobe RGB) is great, but if the thumbs and previews look awful, that’s no use. It’s also not much use to have blog and small sizes – which almost certainly will be used for the web – delivered in Adobe RGB where the customer may complain that the image looks awful in a browser.
Couple of links from SS forums on the subject, in case people don’t believe me
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/abt132390.html
http://submit.shutterstock.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=87970&highlight=Jsnover… why do you have to take the fun out of everything… 😉
Here I figured I had it all figured out and you had to go throw your very accurate monkey wrench into the works…
You have me thinking that other than iStock, everyone else including my Symbiostock site should all be sRGB. If the client asks for Adobe or Prophoto RGB we can deliver those on a per image basis. Too bad our site can’t give the user the option.I’m not with micro stock agencies but with macro stocks and every one of them will reject sRGB and only accept AdobeRGB.
@redneck wrote:
I’m not with micro stock agencies but with macro stocks and every one of them will reject sRGB and only accept AdobeRGB.
Macro agencies are different, and obviously if you think your buyers are more likely to be expecting what the macros would give them, then using CrackerClips workaround, at least for the thumbs and previews, is the best option.
I would definitely put something into the FAQ (or even the image description) about color space (I just edited my FAQ to add this item: http://www.digitalbristles.com/frequently-asked-questions/#colorspace)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.