I tried upload sRGB and Adobe RGB picture. But the color of the uploaded photo is not the same with my original version. How should I get the right color for the uploaded photo?

Thanks!

This is a very difficult question, because so many things can go wrong. If you show your photo in the browser you use for 1x, does it look the same then? 

It should be, and then it's not a problem of 1x, obviously. 

The differences is mostly between colors in Photoshop and Browser.

Screenshots are useless for comparison, btw. If you take a screenshot and open it in Photoshop, you will see what I mean.

Hope this helps,

Mike

If I show my photo in the browser I use for 1x (which is chrome on macos), it do look the same color. I guess the photo uploaded to 1x would loss the color profile in the original version. So the color of the photo uploaded to 1x will look different.

Hello Yan,

Sorry, I can't follow your observations, what looks the same now? You have your photo in Photoshop, as a JPG in your browser and displayed uploaded in 1x. Which two are the same now and which is not?

I don't have a MAC, what does Safari look like? Chrome does not have real color management, but on PC it simulates color profiles pretty well. Maybe that's not the case on MacOS?

I doubt there is something completely wrong on 1x, apart from the scaling everything looks fine. You can alaso upload TIFFs if you don't trust the system.

The color of the photo uploaded to 1x in my chrome browser is different from the original photo. But the color of the local JPG photo showed in my chrome browser is the same with the original photo in Photoshop. So I doubt there is something wrong on 1x. I should get the same color between the 1x version and the original version, but it is not now.

BTW, I tried to upload a tiff photo to 1x, but it was not allowed.

If the JPEG shown in your Chrome and the display in 1x is the same, there is nothing wrong with 1x, Yan. It's rather your MAC showing different colors for Browsers and Photoshop. Since color management is a really difficult field, there are many pitfalls and possibilities why things go wrong. If you google for the problem, you will see you're not the only one facing this issue. I calibrated my Monitor with a Spider device and it all looks the same now - since the color profile of my monitor is correct. "Fotos" in Windows did not regard the profile and colors looked weird, far to saturated. Seems Microsoft updated it a few months ago and now it's consistant. It's a system issue, for sure.

I use 1x, flickre, my website from Google chrome. I use pphotoshop to edit my picture. if I upload in flickr or my website colour retian same as in photoshop but same picture when i upload in 1x I don't see the same colour. 

Did you convert it to sRGB and include the color profile, Kutub?

Actually the JPEG shown in my Chrome and the display in 1x is NOT the same. I think you have misunderstood my words, Mike. The color management in MAC is simple and consistant and I never get this problem before.

Yes. I got the same phenomenon.

Yes. When I converted the photo to sRGB and include the color profile and upload it as a new photo, I got the right color.

So the conclusion is that 1x only supports the sRGB photo.

Yan Yan PRO

mike kreiten PRO

Kutub Uddin PRO

I use 1x, flickre, my website from Google chrome. I use pphotoshop to edit my picture. if I upload in flickr or my website colour retian same as in photoshop but same picture when i upload in 1x I don't see the same colour. 

 

Did you convert it to sRGB and include the color profile, Kutub?

Yes. When I converted the photo to sRGB and include the color profile and upload it as a new photo, I got the right color.

So the conclusion is that 1x only supports the sRGB photo.

 

 

sRGB is generally the best  choice when posting photos for the web, not only for 1x.

And yes, it's recommended in the FAQ to convert to sRGB and include the color profile.

The FAQ in Classic 1X had instructions to upload full resolution files in sRGB, but in the new, Gamma FAQ, I don't see that mentioned.  As Mike wrote, it's the standard for photos on the web.  You can check which profile your photo has, and change it if necessary, with Photoshop . . . . 'Edit>Convert to Profile'. 

When i save pictures from photoshop CC I chose Prophoto RGB. 

There you go... It's the best profile to work with, widest ranges of color grades. But it won't turn into an 8-bit JPG without colour degradation. Most displays are also 8 bit, btw. So you don't "see" the full range while working on it. The working color profile is converted in what your settings for export are, and most likely if you use sRGB, it will be shown correctly in browsers since that's a standard. As said before...

I just did a test due to a messed up Adobe RGB upload to 1x, that btw looks perfect on Facebook.

Prophoto RGB is also messed up. Only sRGB came out right.

Let me bring attention to the fact that mp3 music in 128kbps is ages ago. Someone needs to take the first step. You deffo do not want to be the last! I am extremely surprised and dissapointed to learn that 1x is not supporting minimum Adobe RGB 1998.... Read Nineteenninetyeight. It's 23 years ago.

Someone does not see the picture right, is not an argument to stay in the past.

Yes browsers of today does support Adobe RGB minimum

Yes the printing industry does support Adobe RGB - if not find another supplier fast

Does it barther me to shoot raw in 2021, process for perfection imho and downgrade to sRGB. Big time.

Sorry Henrik B., but I perceive your complaint as bizarre.

You show your work on the internet. People browse with mobile phones, tablets and notebooks potentially having 7-bit displays. Browsers all have different color displaying. Safari, Edge, FireFox, Chrome, Internet Explorer, they all may look slightly different, some do definitely. Viewers may have not adjusted their monitors, the majority even. So what should 1x do about it, the problem exists on every internet site. 

Your RAW file probably has 12 or 14 bits color depth. How much of these does your monitor show? Maximum 10 bit, if you own a really sophisticated one. Or your printer? RAW is only there to have the extra margin in deep and high luminosities. As you will know by preserving the detail in your windows in "Take Me To Church".

If you were an audio engineer, you  would experience the same. You'd record all these fine accoustic details of a classic orchestra, and then have to compess it down to a dynamic range people can enjoy in their car radio, MP3 players, audio streams. Nothing to do with the original experience anymore, but a "consumable" format unless they would have a 20.000 Euro Stereo setup and very tolerant neighbours.

Our eyes (combined with selectiveness of our brains) have 1000x the dynamic range of a modern camera sensor. So "compression" already starts when you take a photo.

The alternative for you would be to create perfect prints of your work and invite people to have a look at them. Reach will be very limited.

Regards,

Mike