With Edge now being a fork of Chromium, there may be hope for support.
On Mon, Feb 3, 2020 at 9:50 AM <graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Dear Chris,
Thank you for your informed reply!
So, on Windowz, under Edge, currently, there is no CMS support? Snif, snif…
/ Roger
*From:* argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> *On
Behalf Of *Chris Lilley
*Sent:* Monday, February 3, 2020 10:31 AM
*To:* argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
*Subject:* [argyllcms] Re: Firefox unusable with cLUT profiles
Firefox only supports ICC v.2 profiles. The tempting-looking user
preference *gfx.color_management.enablev4 *is just a hack to cause it to
not reject ICC v.4 profiles but instead try to pretend they are ICC v.2
profiles (so for example the adapted primaries and whitepoint are treated
as unadapted; it ignores).
Also, by default, Firefox only uses color management for tagged images.
There is a preference, *gfx.color_management.mode,* to use it for
untagged images and stylesheets too.
Everything else, it just throws raw RGB data at the screen so you get
super saturated colors on a wide gamut monitor.
Firefox briefly used lcms which has full ICC v4 support. On the pretext of
a security bug (fixed in a couple of days and never exploited) they
switched to a home-grown CMS called qcms which is ICC v2. only.
Safari and Chrome all display ICC v.4 tagged images and use ICC v.4
monitor profiles correctly. Mozilla has refused to fix this because they
prefer their own code in terms of security review and (I hear) performance.
The defunct IE10 and pre-blink MS Edge understood ICC v.4 profiles but
*ignored
the monitor profile and assumed it was sRGB*.
See the ancient and hopeful Firefox 3.5 developer page
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Firefox/Releases/3.5/ICC_color_correction_in_Firefox
and the 11-years-and-counting bug on ICC v.4 support
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=488800
This page is helpful
https://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/
On 2020-02-03 16:35, graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Vallo,
Interesting sample images! Mostly dark, shadows image -- I like that! That
is precisely where color management matters most, in the shadows. I don't
currently use Firefox (on the PC) but I would like to experiment with it.
Thank you for reporting. I wish I could help further now but I don't really
have much experience with color management in browsers, other than, as I am
told, that Apple Safari is fully color managed.
/ Roger
-----Original Message-----
From: argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf Of Vallo Kallaste
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 5:48 AM
To: argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [argyllcms] Firefox unusable with cLUT profiles
Hi
I've read over the years several comments how bad Firefox color management
is, particularly considering cLUT profiles and thought that I should see
myself.
So I built single matrix (colprof -aS) and relative colorimetric intent (-tr
-s sRGB.icc) profiles from the same ~1700 patch dataset. Monitor gamut
covers almost all of sRGB gamut except for extreme blues and violets (bad
blue primary as usual).
Firefox 72.0.1.
I fired up two instances of FF with same, but renamed profiles with only
difference being CM parameters in user.js file.
FF instance for matrix profile CM parameters:
---
user_pref("gfx.color_management.display_profile",
"3008WFP-D58-g2.4-qh-smtx.icc"); user_pref("gfx.color_management.enablev4",
false); user_pref("gfx.color_management.mode", 1);
user_pref("gfx.color_management.rendering_intent", 1);
FF instance for cLUT profile CM parameters:
---
user_pref("gfx.color_management.display_profile",
"3008WFP-D58-g2.4-XYZdbm-sRGB-qh-tr.icc");
user_pref("gfx.color_management.enablev4", true);
user_pref("gfx.color_management.mode", 1);
user_pref("gfx.color_management.rendering_intent", 0);
For quick check I like to look at the photos here:
https://500px.com/redhed17
Note that switching to fullscreen will upsample the already shown
downsampled picture, so better switch to fullscreen early and click through
gallery one-by-one. Anyway, here are some samples I think are representative
of the problem I see:
https://500px.com/photo/265457183/Rio-De-La-Torre-by-redhed17
https://500px.com/photo/264630533/Rialto-Bridge-317am-by-redhed17
https://500px.com/photo/119624195/Manarola-by-Moonlight-by-redhed17
The last one is particularly bad, losing almost all the details on the dark
mountain side.
Gimp with same cLUT profile has no such behaviour.
As always, I might be doing something dumb or not understanding what I'm
doing and seeing, so I'd like some feedback.
--
Chris Lilley
@svgeesus
Technical Director @ W3C
W3C Strategy Team, Core Web Design
W3C Architecture & Technology Team, Core Web & Media
