embedded profiles confusion, what else is new

A previous thread had made clear that all pics should have a sRGB profile embedded. I looked into this and noticed that LR was embedding this profile and that others also have this one: sRGB IEC61966-2.1
I use spectraview to and the puck that came with the monitor to profile it and pics look fine on my 2690WUXI2, but the profile file name that spectraview creates is totally different: LCD2690WUXi2 96301445YA 2010-04-09 21-41 D65 2.20
Should I use the latter when exporting in LR or just set the export color space option to sRGB? I can't see a difference on my PC but I have been told by others that my pics are oversaturated.

Any clarification is highly appreciated!

Thomas

I convert images from Adobe RGB to sRGB before saving for the web.

Thanks for the quick response, Alex, but I feel I should clarify that I rarely print my pictures. I try to use only LR and PS only for tricky things. So my output is created almost exclusively in LR and during export from raw to jpeg I have used until now the sRGB option for color space, giving me the seemingly generic profile mentioned in my first post. Should I be using the profile that spectraview creates in this option?

Thomas

Thomas,

Greetings. Let me give your specific issues a try:

sRGB and sRGB IEC61966-2.1 are the same. While there are other sRGB profiles (such as Nikon sRGB 4.0.0.3002) not to worry about the precise name... any sRGB is sufficient.

Spectraview (AFAIK) is for monitor calibration and the LCD2690WUXi2 96301445YA 2010-04-09 21-41 D65 2.20 profile is how it names a profile created for your monitor.

Here is the important part: The sRGB profile you attach to your image file in the metadata (aka ICC color profile) and the profile for your monitor are two different things, have different purposes, and should not be confused with each other.

That is, the sRGB profile in the metadata of an image presents the image in agreed upon meaning for the R, G, & B information for each pixel. The monitor profile is used to take that agreed upon information and display the image with the monitor's specific color rendering capability.

Hope you're still with me. Simply put: sRGB is the profile you want for your image metadata, only think about the monitor profile when you are calibrating your monitor (else wise forget about it).

When people say your images are oversaturated (when they look at them on other monitors), this can only have meaning (for you) if their monitors are calibrated and they are looking at your image (which has the color profile in the metadata) and they are looking at them with a color managed viewer (browser, image viewing software, etc.). Other wise, the oversaturated appearance may be a feature of how their monitor or viewer displays images.

Hope this makes sense.

Cheers,

-Michael-

Michael, yes, that makes a lot of sense. two totally different things, which makes sense, now that I understand the different processes. This colour management stuff is a challenge.

Thanks!

Thomas

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Thomas Boysen

Thanks for the quick response, Alex, but I feel I should clarify that I rarely print my pictures. I try to use only LR and PS only for tricky things. So my output is created almost exclusively in LR and during export from raw to jpeg I have used until now the sRGB option for color space, giving me the seemingly generic profile mentioned in my first post. Should I be using the profile that spectraview creates in this option?

Thomas

---

I use ACR and then PS for all images to fine-tune in Adobe RGB and 16 bit to have as much information as possible, regardless if I want to print it or not. The last step before saving for web is then to convert to sRGB and 8 bit.

Fully agree with Axel ... sound advice !!!