Quote Originally Posted by Tannin View Post
All I want is for Photoshop to display the same image in the same colours as any normal program does (any of 50 image viewers, web browsers, and so on). I just want to see perfectly ordinary, everyday SRGB.
Quote Originally Posted by Damo77 View Post
No, that's not how colour management works. Not all programs are colour-managed. Photoshop is, of course, and so is Bridge, but most of those 50 other viewers that you mentioned will not be.
To "make Photoshop match them" is to make Photoshop display incorrectly.
Thanks so much for the reply Damien.

Is there is something I'm not getting here? Or have I explained the requirement incorrectly? Let's review.

As I understand things, when we callibrate a screen, the system is colour-corrected. Instead of its default look-up colour table, Windows substitutes a monitor-specific one created by the callibration software, which in turn is guided by the colorimeter.

At this point, most programs behave exactly as before except that Windows uses our monitor-specific look-up table to display the requested colours instead of a default generic one - i.e., the colours these programs display are now correct. (Or as correct as may be given the hardware limitations of the system.)

What colour managed programs do ... well, dammed if I know. Sometimes they work properly, sometimes they don't. My old install of Photoshop CC 2015 was apparently OK, but after upgrading to CC 2017, it was a mile out. Clearly, Photoshop was adding further "corrections" of its own, meaning that images processed by PS, when displayed in any other program on a corrected system, were horribly wrong.

Ameerat's settings cure the problem. I can now edit an image in Photoshop, look at it with any other software I like, and what I see is what I get. No more guesswork!

What's more, I can upload that image to the web or email it to my granny, and what she sees is the same as what I see, subject only to:

(a) any miscallibration of her screen. There is nothing I can do about that. I just have to hope that it isn't too far out. Thankfully, she is (of course) used to her own screen and thinks it is "normal". If I could somehow guess what is wrong with her display (too blue, bet your boots on that) and send her an image "corrected" to account for that .... well, it would come up in the right colours, and Granny - being used to her own system - would most likely think it was murky and reddish. (If she noticed the difference at all, of course.)

(b) Any changes her system introduces on a per-image basis - e.g., changes introduced by a colour-managed browser if she has one. We have no way of knowing whether she will be using colour-managed or unmanaged software. So what we need to do is provide the image with a colour profile that says "don't change anything, just show this image in the standard way you display everything else on this system, same as a non-managed viewer".

^ That is my understanding of how the system works, and as a natural consequence of that understanding, the simplest, most reliable way to work within its limitations given the aim of having pictures look as right as possible both to my imaginary granny and to people using colour-aware applications. Have I misunderstood something vital? If so, what?


Quote Originally Posted by Damo77 View Post
What screen do you have, and which calibrator?
For the record, I'm running twin monitors: a ridiculously expensive Dell (apparently a 3014, though for reasons best known to themselves they don't bother to write the model number anywhere visible) and my wonderful old (also ridiculously expensive back in the day when a dollar was a doillar, or possibly more) Samsung SynchMaster 214T.

It is a Windows limitation that you can only load a single colour profile into a graphics card, so I just accept that the secondary monitor (the Samsung) will have strange colours if I callibrate for the Dell. (My T-Series Thinkpad actually has twin graphics cards; it may or may not be possible to configure it to use the Intel on-chip graphics for the second screen (and thus have a different colour callibration) rather than use the Nvidia card to drive both. I might investigate that one rainy day, but it's not important. One corrected monitor is enough to go on with.)

I have a Spyder 4 because I lost the Spyder 3 I bought when I couldn't find the Spyder 2.

Don't laugh!

Well, OK, laugh.

I have since found the Spyder 2 and sold it, and also found the Spyder 3 when I moved out of the shop. (Remind me to sell that one too.)

Apparently the Dell has some advanced internal callibration abilities, but to use them you have to buy yet another damn callibrator of a different brand because they don't bother making it compatible with anything except X-Rite. But you can, of course, simply callibrate it in the normal way, which should make it as good as any other 2560 x 1600 IPS monitor.

(So why spend that insane amount on the Dell? Because (a) it's lovely and big, (b) it has a much better aspect ratio than practically anything else on the market, and (c) it is the highest resolution screen the elderly but high-spec Thinkpad will accept. I should get another three to five years out of the Thinkpad and I just hope the Dell lasts that long because (given modern product lifecycles) it will be irreplacable any day now, meaning I'd need a new Thinkpad as well and T-Series Thinkpads cost a fortune so I try make them last.)