Looking at
https://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/
<https://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/> in
Edge build 18908 compared to Chrome Canary 82.0.4046.2 the test
"How far from sRGB is your display color gamut?" is different. In
Chrome, the ProPhoto half of the test is, correctly, much more saturated
than the sRGB portion. In Edge, both halves are the same (which would
indicate my display is sRGB; it is not) and importantly, both halves are
highly saturated which implies the RGB data is just being thrown at the
screen and, like IE9 and Edges before it, the display profile is being
ignored.
On 2020-02-03 18:47, Eric Brown wrote:
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 <mailto: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
<mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>> *On Behalf Of *Chris Lilley
*Sent:* Monday, February 3, 2020 10:31 AM
*To:* argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto: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
<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
<https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=488800>
This page is helpful
https://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/
<https://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/>
On 2020-02-03 16:35, graxx@xxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto: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 <mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
<argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <mailto:argyllcms-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On
Behalf Of Vallo Kallaste
Sent: Monday, February 3, 2020 5:48 AM
To:argyllcms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto: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 ;<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/265457183/Rio-De-La-Torre-by-redhed17>
https://500px.com/photo/264630533/Rialto-Bridge-317am-by-redhed17 ;
<https://500px.com/photo/264630533/Rialto-Bridge-317am-by-redhed17>
https://500px.com/photo/119624195/Manarola-by-Moonlight-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
