@TomM
Stripping the profile now isn’t a real issue because the recent versions apply sRGB when a picture has no embedded profile. Previous versions did not. Years ago, working with a wide-gamut monitor, Safari showed oversaturated colors, because the numbers of the RGB were sent to the monitor without the “translation” of the profile. In the last versions it was fixed.
So, the simple stripping of the profile (if the original picture is sRGB) is not a problem.
The trouble is the conversion in the monitor color profile, as Photo Album do.
I have two MacPro (2009 and 2013) one with a standard sRGB display and the other with a wide-gamut display. If I create the same Photo Album with the same sRGB pictures in the two Macs, I obtain different pictures, because PhotoAlbum converts in two different monitor profiles, one approximately sRGB and the other approximately AdobeRGB.
@Trystero Stacks that have this (all updated Joe Workman/BWD stacks, for instance) have a + sign in a circle at the bottom of the stack in edit mode. You create child stacks to hold content inside the parent stack by clicking the plus sign to add more. Once created, they are easily altered and dragged around, but they are not able to live outside of the stack they were created by. It’s a more elegant implementation of the helper stacks that some have been designing for a while, but with the functionality fully baked into Stacks now. Joe just did a video on the subject this last week.
Okay, it’s my fault …
I was pretty sure of always having chosen the maximum quality in Photo Album, but it was not.
The quality was set to HIGH as default value, but the maximum is BEST.
With Best photos are saved with their original color profile (only photos, not thumbnails)
With High are converted to the color profile of my monitor and saved without profile.
I think it’s still a bug to fix in the other settings, but now I know that there is a solution and I can publish Photo Albums with the right color profiles in the photos.
@Trystero So we have the same background (yes, I used a MacPlus too, with PS1.0) and I’m delighted that you know your stuff. Try running a support page for a while and you get a wee bit cynical about everyone thinking AdobeRGB is the be all and end all of life, the universe and everything. Now if they mention Bruce RGB, you know who you are talking too…
OK, so I agree your point and yes the images are different, but not so much that 99% of all clients would notice. Yes, all software should be colour managed, but sadly it is not. As I have got older, I have chilled, and after various hard lessons in the early noughties, I even started delivering images to clients in sRGB - yes, the ones from my Phase One back - because people did not appreciate the difference and it saved arguments with repro houses & publishers who screwed up.
Update Glad you found the setting - I’ll check it myself
@Colorwave Not smaller than sRGB, I said “the gamut is too small” Why work just in aRGB when can choose ProPhoto or the optimal space for the image to make colour adjustments? aRGB did became the fashionable space for photographers in 2003 / 4? (Thanks Adobe), graduated to the back of Canon cameras and everyone imagined it was the magic bullet to improve their pictures. The problem was, as we all know, that people making colour adjustments on laptops or cheap monitors can’t see the colour they are adjusting. I had a great time training photographers for a very large news agency not to try colour correcting their jpegs, in the field on uncalibrated laptops…Long story
So where are we now? I hate to admit, but if I’m not making big prints on my LF printer, I tend to use a pure sRGB workflow. Don’t even get me started on the chaos about colour in the world of video and TV, where very few calibrate screens, except by eye…
I receive both sRGB and AdobeRGB from clients. Plus customized CMYK for the inkjet print of the ceramic tiles, until 100x300cm at 300dpi (giant giga files)
I convert the CMYK to RGB to work in Cinema4D or Photoshop, but I tend to keep the same profile the client sent me: sRGB if the originals were in sRGB, AdobeRGB if the originals have this profile.
For the web only sRGB.
Because you are educated - you know how to handle files and colour. Even now Photoshop ‘box settings’ (for colour) can be a minefield for those who really don’t understand.
When I ask what format clients would like images and answer comes back “High res” or “Three hundred dpi” I shiver (in horror).
[quote=“NickWB, post:26, topic:2042”]
even now ‘box settings’ (for colour) can be a minefield for those who really don’t understand.[/quote]
I know, the first time a user installs Photoshop, the default setting for sRGB is “Monitor profile”. The worst possible setting.
Next time send them a postage stamp sized picture, but carefully set at 300dpi
I, too, remember Freehand with misty-eyed fondness. I remember when Adobe’s Illustrator '88 came out and at the Washington D.C. Apple Pi event I coordinated to show off this new wonder, the audience practically fainted when the ability to do a bezier curve was demonstrated. The feeling of being able to see a full page with my new Radius Full Page Display instead of the teeny tiny Mac SE screen was joyful. Color was a wishful thought-you worked in black and white and specced color via Pantone books. You never even got to see it, just “guess”. And a color printer? Dream on! Those were the wild west days of “desktop publishing”.
Rapidweaver Photo Album default setting is on Quality > HIGH
In this way the sRGB photos are converted to the color profile of my monitor (wide-gamut) and saved without profile, so no one can see the pictures in the right way.
Only this morning I tried with Quality > BEST and this way the photos are saved with their original sRGB color profile.
But the thumbnails of the gallery remain with wrong colors, also with HIGH Quality setting.
Thanks, guys, for a very stimulating discussion. It was conducted mostly by “dinosaurs” of the digital era, but that’s what made it interesting.
BTW, I count myself as one of the dinosaurs (I am a photographer since 1971, Mac user since 1994 and Photoshop user since version 3.1).
Cheers to the league of dinosaurs!!!
P.S. Perhaps this group should write a tutorial for the rest of the community on creating/editing/pre-production of photos and how to use them with the RW? Just a suggestion…
There is a way to bypass the problem for those who work with a wide-gamut monitor (~AdobeRGB), even with the low quality settings (and thumbnails too).
My standard monitor profile was made for prints and photography, and it covers the wide-gamut of the LaCie324.
1- Create a new monitor profile, chosing “WEB” as preset. This contain the sRGB space.
2- Change the monitor settings in the System Preferences > Monitor to this new WEB_sRGB before starting a project in Rapidweaver.
3- This way the pictures and thumbnails are converted to the sRGB monitor profile and saved without the profile, not a problem because the web browsers apply sRGB when a picture has no embedded or tagged profile.
4- After closing Rapidweaver, return to the original profile of the monitor for the work in other software.
I tried, it works.
But a real fix of the issue would be preferable.
@instacks
I just purchased Gallery Stack and tried to work with it, but I get no preview.
Unfortunately I did not read this in the tutorial before:
"Previewing the page inside RapidWeaver is unfortunately not possible due to JavaScript loading of the remote photo album. " In this way it is too difficult to work with this stack, at least for me.
I will return to the classic Rapidweaver Photo Album, with Preference System > Monitor > Color set to a different profile, as I explained in the previous message.
Why work just in aRGB when can choose ProPhoto or the optimal space for the image to make colour adjustments? aRGB did became the fashionable space for photographers in 2003 / 4? (Thanks Adobe), graduated to the back of Canon cameras and everyone imagined it was the magic bullet to improve their pictures. The problem was, as we all know, that people making colour adjustments on laptops or cheap monitors can’t see the colour they are adjusting. I had a great time training photographers for a very large news agency not to try colour correcting their jpegs, in the field on uncalibrated laptops…Long story 
