Forums

Hi all,

I am having trouble with the image quality in flash modus.

If you visit my site at www.jarle.priv.no, find the bird picture, look at that picture in flash, press "Open in Pop Up Window" and place that new window next to the gallery window. You are now comparing the same picture, one showed using the flash module and one in html modus (the pop up shows the picture in html).

You will see that the picture showed in html are much more vibrant and that the picture showed in Flash is bleak in comparison. The html version is as in Photoshop, so that is "correct" and it seems that the Flash module takes the vibrance out of the picture.

You will observe the same phenomenon if you do the same exercise with the picture under "Landscape", but it will be less apparent because the original picture has less vibrance to it.

Any tricks to solve this?

I noticed that the profile of the image is 'Prophoto RGB'.
I do not know this one, but I would suggest to save the image with the profile 'sRGB'.

This is your color profile, which some browsers can display and some can't (including imagevue-flash). See my post here:
viewtopic.php?p=26681#p26681

Scroll down to next post from Nick in that thread, where he suggests a solution.

That solves it. Many thanks.

Best regards,
m

To bad I can't get the problem solved...
I "save for web" in Photoshop. I "insert sRGB" and the picture is also in sRGB.
But still there is difference in the pictures when I view them in the Flash Gallry and when they are viewed in the HTML Gallery?
Tried it in Chrome, Safari and Firefox. I don't have IE because I'm using a Mac...
The HTML view is how it should be, but I tried everything to view the picture that way in the Flash Gallery with no result...
Made a test album to see the problem:

FLASH:
http://pictures.darthstijn.be/#/content/03klanten/test/

HTML:
http://pictures.darthstijn.be/?content/03klanten/test/

Need some help please?

You can see the difference in the face of the kid...

The direct link to the picture also gives the pictures like it has to be, so I think there is a problem with the Flash?

http://www.darthstijn.be/pictures/content/03klanten/test/nena_210412_0022.jpg

Are you just glancing at them and making out the difference? I made snapshots from both html- and flash, and then layered them over each other, and then masked out in the middle to compare side-by-side and this is the result I get:

The white line in the middle represents the border between the two version, and I can't see any difference. You know your eyes play tricks on you if glaring at different size images in different backgrounds? Also, are you 100% sure that you are viewing the images at 100% scaled size? If the image is downscaled in Flash (to fit margins), it will also look "different". Here, I scaled both images to 100%, got snapshots and overlayed them as in the snapshot.

There may be a very slight difference, and I don't think I am capable of technically explaining why - Maybe its how each technology renders the color profile? In any case, saying its poor image quality in flash might be a bit exaggerated?

Verry strange! I removed the color profile my Spider made and everything is ok.
When I turn on the profile it shows a difference in flash and html?
So the problem is not the gallery... Sorry for that!

Yes, this is because Spyder is an software-calibration tool and unfortunatelly not interact with flash (and with some other things), what hardware calibrators do...
I had the same problem, I've sent spyder back to shop and bought hardware-calibrated monitor.

I'm not sure about this.
The Spyder-tool and software generates a color profile by calibrating the monitor.
But this color profile is then loaded into the video card.
So, everything that is seen on the screen, either it be flash of html, will be seen by means of this corrected video card.

I do not understand why turning on/off the profile would influence viewing in flash or html.

There's something that realy can affect colours in some applications when specific color profile is in use.
I don't know if you remember, but in the past, windows browser (XP I think) couldn't display images in same way as you seen them working in photoshop when you've got enabled calibrated color profile in video-card... Even if both of images was converted to sRGB.
I'm not realy expert in this but for me this was looks like windows couldn't recognize as many colours as you could see in PS after calibration.

I'm not an expert either...
I think a color profile does not influence the range of colors (the gamut) a program can show, but it rather corrects every RGB combination by adding or substracting some values.
Photoshop has always shown more colors than browsers have, because its gamut is aRGB (Adobe RGB) and this is a wider gamut than sRGB.
But then again... this does not explain why an image in sRGB still displays differently in Photoshop and in a browser...

Oh... I don't know...
It really is a difficult topic... it's a study in itself

That's right