[Neel1]

Why is there such a huge difference in colours between Photoshop and Windows photo viewer. I use Photoshop to retouch my photos but then I note that my photos do not look the same at all inside Windows photo viewer which would be used by most PC users or even Picasa Viewer. When I do a video montage with my photos, I also note a huge difference in colours inside videos.....I have to retouch my photos again to make it look nice inside videos....Is that a normal thing?

There are some print studios where I go to print my photos, not all of them, where my photos would look a lot darker compared to what I see on my own screen inside photoshop. I always need to review my photos inside Windows photo viewer to make sure it will look good when printing in these studios....What is the issue here please?

Attached Images

 

[swanlefitte]

Just commenting on what i see on my galaxy
First to red. Second to green. What screen do you want right? I wonder about how others see my photos.

[IggzDaLoc]

You're likely using a different color profile in PS.

Check via Edit > Color Settings

[stevebrot]

Save your JPGs out to sRGB and they should look the same.

Edit: The struck out text is not quite correct, though the issue is a matter of colorspace. PS is displaying to a different colorspace than Windows Photo Viewer. Can you provide a link to download the original?


Steve

[wildman]

Is that a normal thing?

Yes.
To the extent thatl gear, software and configuration are different to that extent they are going to interpret and display the data in an image file differently.
How could it be otherwise?

[stevebrot]

the issue is a matter of colorspace

Here is a link to a decent tutorial on Color Management, including implications for printing and publishing to the Web.

Tutorials on Color Management & Printing

Note that the navigation is complicated by a few ads that look like content.

Of particular interest might be the section on using Photoshop's "Soft Proofing" facility as an aide to editing to print output.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/soft-proofing.htm


Steve

[Neel1]

I even use the Colourchecker passport in my photoshoots to make sure that the colours are good...

Here is the original of the photo.:
Dropbox - Ava April 2015-8345a.tif

---------- Post added 01-02-17 at 02:28 PM ----------

Here is a link to a decent tutorial on Color Management, including implications for printing and publishing to the Web.

Tutorials on Color Management & Printing

Note that the navigation is complicated by a few ads that look like content.

Of particular interest might be the section on using Photoshop's "Soft Proofing" facility as an aide to editing to print output.

Soft Proofing: Matching On-Screen Photos with Prints


Steve

Thanks I will go through it!

[Na Horuk]

Yes, check out color management.
The first thing you can do is make sure that color space in-camera is the same as all the software you will be using. You can convert the colour space as one of the last steps, but try to keep it the same throughout. sRGB is the one that is best for internet and easiest to work with, though some people claim AdobeRGB and ProRGB have a little more nuances in the gamut.
Next is bit depth. This one rarely affects the image, but you should be mindful of how much you switch between 24bit, 16bit, 8bit.
And then there is the Camera color profile. When you open a raw photo (dng, pef) the software uses a certain profile to draw the colors. Raw is not yet an image, so the software has to interpret the raw. It can interpret it in different ways. In some software this is easy to change and you even have different profiles available. You can usually make your own or find them online. I'd recommend you find a good color profile for your camera online, one that is from the same Brand but can be used in various softwares.
Finally, make sure you don't have automatic PP. Some software will automatically apply some corrections as soon as you open a raw. This can be great and save time, but it can also confuse you if you don't expect it. Just another thing to keep in mind, though it might not be the problem here.
In this case I think its mostly camera color profiles and possible color space that are the main coulprits

There are some print studios where I go to print my photos, not all of them, where my photos would look a lot darker compared to what I see on my own screen inside photoshop.

This is fairly normal just because your computer screen is literally a shining light, while a print is just ink on paper, reflecting ambient light. Usually for prints people do a special PP, different from digital publishing. You have to add some brightness and add some sharpening for prints. The other problem is that some print shops assume you know nothing and they photoshop the image before printing. This can be a whole new wrinkle and completely change your photo. You should talk to them about this first. Some stores even do auto corrections, which change colors and contrasts.

OH and one more thing - a Raw editor lets you develop a raw photo into an image. A photo viewer only gives you previews of the Raw. These previews are not the best and are often just embedded preview jpegs (according to in-camera settings) or a certain interpretation of the raw data. This can be completely different from what a raw editor will show you. This is why I usually don't recommend using 'photo viewers' or codecs for raw files. Its best to stick to raw software with cataloging, which has reasonable previews and shows you the real raw data with the PP that you applied. Raw software also usually has easy color management options, unlike graphics software which has slightly different goals

[D1N0]

It's because of picasa photo viewer. (you're not using windows photo viewer) . Picasa doesn't color manage by default for some stupid reason. Doe this: Picasa - Enable color management in photo viewer and it will show the colors correctly.

[Homo_erectus]

Color management with the windows photo viewer is a real crap shoot. What those images look like to me is that the original is in AdobeRGB 1998 color space and the windows photo viewer is using some default color space which is probably sRGB. If you use a colormunki to calibrate your display you need to make a version 2 ICC profile. It defaults to version 4 and the windows photo viewer only understands version 2. Adobe bridge is a good application to use since it is color managed. Also, soft proofing in Photoshop is the best method for print proofing. The Photos app in windows 10 isn't any better than the old photo viewer either.

[k5astro]

This is such an F'd up complicated subject. I never quite understand the colour management from the sensor to the screen/print. It goes through many conversions. I've dived into it but never really satisfied with the explanation because people talk about colour space but not the conversion process. Anyway, you'll have to really study up on this, and this site should help a lot: Cambridge in Colour - Photography Tutorials & Learning Community

[stevebrot]

sRGB is the one that is best for internet and easiest to work with, though some people claim AdobeRGB and ProRGB have a little more nuances in the gamut.

A few comments:

• Gamut is a difficult concept and is the range of tones that defines a particular color space. The greater the range, the wider the gamut. The concepts of colorspace, gamut, and color profile are all closely related.
• sRGB is the lowest common denominator and has the narrowest gamut (range of supported tones) of commonly used color spaces. Almost all display devices and software support sRGB. Very few display devices fully support any of the wide gamut colorspaces.
• AdobeRGB and Pro Photo RGB are both considered to be wide gamut, with Pro Photo RGB being the wider of the two. Adobe Lightroom uses AdobeRGB for all views except the Develop module where a variant of Pro Photo RGB (so-called "Melissa") is used.
• Working within a wide gamut allows greater flexibility when editing and when publishing to diverse target environments. The general rule is to capture and edit wide and publish to suit the intended target environment. For example, I edit in Pro Photo RGB and publish to the Web as sRGB. (Hint: RAW capture has no colorspace and has infinitely wide gamut as a result.)
• Converting to a narrower gamut involves a process where tones are "coerced" into close matches in the target colorspace
• Disturbing colorshifts may happen when the process of coercion goes wrong. The examples in this thread's original post illustrate that nicely with the right hand image being an uncontrolled coercion to sRGB.

Steve

[Neel1]

It's because of picasa photo viewer. (you're not using windows photo viewer) . Picasa doesn't color manage by default for some stupid reason. Doe this: Picasa - Enable color management in photo viewer and it will show the colors correctly.

Actually yes....here in this photo, but I can put Picassa and Windows Photo viewer and get more or less the same image!!

[stevebrot]

I even use the Colourchecker passport in my photoshoots to make sure that the colours are good...

Here is the original of the photo.:
Dropbox - Ava April 2015-8345a.tif

According to the XMP metadata, the colorspace is ProPhoto RGB with embedded profile. Programs that support color management will display the image properly within the limitations of the monitor. Non-color-managed environments will generally default to sRGB with who-knows-what rendering intent.

This is fine for working copies of the TIFF, but is something to be aware of before sending a file for printing or to publish to the Web.* If working with a print shop or service bureau, they may be able to provide you with suggestions for how to tune your files to their process to avoid overly dark or dull results.


Steve

* Every once in awhile we get a submission to the Pentax Exclusive Gallery on this site (I am a judge) that simply sucks color-wise on the smaller version presented to the judges, but where the original looks fine in a color-managed browser. This results from submitting a wide gamut image for judging. (The forum software strips the embedded profile when making the small version.)

[k5astro]

A few comments:

• Gamut is a difficult concept and is the range of tones that defines a particular color space. The greater the range, the wider the gamut. The concepts of colorspace, gamut, and color profile are all closely related.
• sRGB is the lowest common denominator and has the narrowest gamut (range of supported tones) of commonly used color spaces. Almost all display devices and software support sRGB. Very few display devices fully support any of the wide gamut colorspaces.
• AdobeRGB and Pro Photo RGB are both considered to be wide gamut, with Pro Photo RGB being the wider of the two. Adobe Lightroom uses AdobeRGB for all views except the Develop module where a variant of Pro Photo RGB (so-called "Melissa") is used.
• Working within a wide gamut allows greater flexibility when editing and when publishing to diverse target environments. The general rule is to capture and edit wide and publish to suit the intended target environment. For example, I edit in Pro Photo RGB and publish to the Web as sRGB. (Hint: RAW capture has no colorspace and has infinitely wide gamut as a result.)
• Converting to a narrower gamut involves a process where tones are "coerced" into close matches in the target colorspace
• Disturbing colorshifts may happen when the process of coercion goes wrong. The examples in this thread's original post illustrate that nicely with the right hand image being an uncontrolled coercion to sRGB.

Steve

Thanks for this! I think you are the first person to mention the colour space of RAW. Something that always bugged me. I always shoot RAW, and I'm inferring from what you've said that as usual with RAW settings, the colour space setting in the camera won't matter. Can you clarify one more little mystery about camera settings... Does white balance have any affect on the RAW image? My working belief is no even though a lot of people keep fussing about it.

Oh yes, and one more thing does DNG contain these setting infos? And if so I presume Lightroom acts accordingly?