Firefox 9 - color management?

<p>Hi with a past version of Firefox I had color management installed but it seemed to be incompatible with the later versions. I have googled and looked under Firefox add-ons to no avail. Is there anyone who have installed color management with FF 9?</p>

<p>Cheers.</p>

<p>it's built-in. go to...... about:config and then filter for 'gfx' and set the mode to '1'</p>

<p>there is some googling you can do to decipher what some of the settings are/should be</p>

<p>It's done the same way it's always been done. You type "about:config" in the URL address bar. Agree to the warning. Then type "gfx" in the filter window. One of the items will be "gfx.color_management.enablev4". If the Value is "false," right click on the item and hit "toggle." That enables color management. Anything "installed" only does this minor setup for you, there's nothing beyond changing that value in the settings.</p>

<p>Thanks guys :-) </p>

<p>I must of done it the other way before by using a 3rd party plugin ...</p>

<p>Just the usual warning, of course: if you set up your own browser to show you non-standard (meaning, non-sRGB) profiles correctly, you may occasionally forget that most other people will <em>not</em> see those images the same way. That can cause some confusion, or make people think some very different things about those images than you're expecting them to think.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Just the usual warning, of course: if you set up your own browser to show you non-standard (meaning, non-sRGB) profiles correctly, you may occasionally forget that most other people will <em>not</em> see those images the same way. That can cause some confusion, or make people think some very different things about those images than you're expecting them to think.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That is great advice. I "knew" that, or so I thought, but promptly forgot. I've since turned grey trying to figure out why others didn't like my pictures for the rich colors I saw. Thanks for the reminder Matt.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>if you set up your own browser to show you non-standard (meaning, non-sRGB) profiles correctly, you may occasionally forget that most other people will <em>not</em> see those images the same way.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This has nothing to do with the browser. The problem is that the people who don't have a color-managed browser aren't going to have a calibrated monitor, and neither will most people who do use a color-managed browser. It's going to be different no matter what. The number of calibration devices sold is trivial, and having a browser that is color managed on a monitor that isn't calibrated means browser choice will rarely be the determining factor. To me, the primary value of using a calibrated is that I can have other people in the publishing chain look at it and see what I'm seeing, since most of them see it first in a browser.</p>

<p>i have a long time ago accept the fact that many user wont see my web site as i see it, or at the full visual quality color / density that it should. Good thing is, i still get work because of it and my presence on the web anyway ; )</p>

<p>Big store chain make all possible to make there cloth the real color while shoothing, processing and posting, they want there customer to get the real color on there monitor for ecom.. even if it mean for them also that most of there client dont have a calibrated monitor. So why do they put all this energy making it look like the original if most user cant see it; because like Jeff said, they are sure that other people in the publishing chain look at it and see what they seeing.</p>

<p>You have a calibrated display? good for you. You have a web site and want to make sure other see the image as good as you on there monitor? well, that is kind of not possible at this current time, until a calibrator is part of every computer box BUT for now, you can put a little gradient scale on the bottom of your web site with a little warning at least for the density and contrast.. witch is alreadya big step of better visual representation on a monitor. Most PC user have a darker red monitor, most Mac user have a too bright bluish monitor to start... so setting there luminosity correctly can be of a good starting point.</p>

<p> </p>

<p>Even with a color managed browser, there is no guarantee they will see what you saw exactly but it should be closer than those using a non color managed browser. Then we have all the other issues such as those working with wide gamut displays, flash galleries that are not color managed (LR4 now thankfully builds color manages flash galleries FWIW). </p>

<p>Jeff: But if you use Adobe RGB in a JPG, and go to look at it using an ICC-aware browser, it's going to look good to you. But when someone using a profile-blind browser (or a browser with that feature disabled) looks at the same JPG, it's going to be rendered as if it were sRGB, and look dull. Whether or not the user's display is calibrated is secondary.</p>

<p><em>"Whether or not the user's display is calibrated is secondary."</em><br /> You're right. IMHO, the question is not whether their browsers are color managed or their display is calibrated. I would be happy if all displays at least looked like they came from the planet Earth.</p>

<p>I regularly run into some monitors (including relatively high end wide gamut units) that have been manually adjusted by their owners with such bizarre and over-the-top saturated colors that it is absurd. The folks that I question about this often tell me that they tried different settings until they found one that made their P&S family snapshots look good. They just don't have a clue.</p>

<p>Unfortunately, a couple of the folks in this category that I know are managers, and are in positions where they can strongly influence the selection of my images for publication and web use by their organization. I've tried to gently educate two of them (without pissing them off), but when I return a couple of months later, their monitor still looks the same.</p>

<p>I've taken to coming in with my images on a laptop with decent color, saying something like, <em>"Oh, lets just use my laptop. The images are already loaded on it." </em>When I leave, I get a bit more pointed, and always remind them that the images will look very different on different monitors (especially theirs), and that they should leave any color correction decisions to their web designer / publications editor (who is not the most technically savy, but at least has a decent image viewing system, at least for sRGBs). <em><br /></em></p>

<p>Arghhh.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Whether or not the user's display is calibrated is secondary.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not from what I've seen. What I have found is that most monitors are too bright out of the box, and if the user adjusts them without calibration, they adjust them even brighter. I have seen my photos look pretty bad on color-managed browsers because of monitor settings.</p>