Uploaded photos are desaturated

[longjohn]

I just uploaded some photos to a thread I started in ride tales:  Torrey Fall 2020 post your pics. The photos have been desaturated by the forum software. A quick google search hints that the problem may be what color space the forum uses, i.e. rgb or srgb. Other forums that I post to don’t alter the pics, like adv, or photography on the net. Is there a way to change what color space the forum uses?  Here is a link my post at adv, where many of the pics are the same as I posted on this site. If you open up two browser windows you can clearly see the diff.  https://advrider.com/f/threads/things-you-took-pictures-of-this-past-week.568350/page-1441#post-41036170
 

 

[chrisolson]

 

4 hours ago, longjohn said:

Here is a link my post at adv, where many of the pics are the same as I posted on this site. 

 

not an adv member so I can't access pics

 

 

4 hours ago, longjohn said:

Is there a way to change what color space the forum uses?

There is no setting available to us that controls color space ...we don't store images within the forum environment

 

Images are stored and served separately on Amazon ... its possible they strip the ICC profile info to save space ... which, from what I understand,  can have a different effect with different browsers/monitors  ... apparently the effect is to wash out/desaturate colors for photos set for adobe RGB 

 

LINKY

 

If so, unfortunately it is what it is.

 

 

What browser are you using?

[longjohn]

Oy. I posted in the basement on adv where you need to be a member. Rats

 

i use safari. 
 

thanks for your time. 

[lkraus]

I'm not a photo expert, and some tests indicate that I might have some slight color blindness, but I'm not sure there is a big  problem here.

 

At first, I did see a difference, with more vivid colors at ADVrider.  But I often include optical illusions in my desktop wallpaper rotation, some of which rely on the image backgrounds to fool the eye, and I realized that here on BMWST I use the default white background, and on ADVRider, I use their black background (Black Responsive).  So I changed the AdvRider theme background to white and compared again.  To my eye, using a 4K TV as a desktop monitor and white backgrounds at both sites, the colors seemed to be the same. 

 

Out of curiosity, I also saved some images from each site to my computer and found that the images from ADVRider had a better resolution (300x300ppi) than BMWST (96x96ppi), which would tend to make that image appear better. Again that's a setting that might be determined by the Amazon server.  ADVRider might favor image quality as a result of the connection between ADVRider and SmugMug, and the fact that it uses the SmugMug servers for storage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[chrisolson]

1 hour ago, lkraus said:

ADVRider had a better resolution (300x300ppi) than BMWST (96x96ppi),

 

I had forgotten ...

 

images uploaded in a post are compressed while those to the gallery are not.

 

I believe it has to do with bandwidth more than storage as both the pics in posts and the gallery are stored and served on Amazon  ... so Amazon is not the issue !

 

ADV and photo sites need to insure overall quality vs bandwidth while ours limits quality to images in the gallery.

 

Just did a quick test and downloaded a pic from the gallery and then uploaded it to a test post.  Checked size and resolution before and after ....  and the difference was dramatic.

 

 

 

longjohn ..... you might upload the same pics to the gallery  ... either create your own album OR just put them in Miscellaneous as a test to see if the quality improves. 

 

 

[longjohn]

I’ll do some tinkering when I get home.  On my 27” Mac the diff in comparing two open browser windows is noticeable. Bmw St also restricts image size. I have to tell you, seeing the jpegs full size on the desktop is especially after whatever  small adjustments are added.
 

the switchback pics will be posted today.  
 

ive gotten into The habit of saving pics as rgb, after clicking “save as” because it’s easy. Saving for the web opens up a whole different window and options, hence more work. Photoshop is certainly NOT intuitive. 

[Bill_Walker]

1 hour ago, longjohn said:

Photoshop is certainly NOT intuitive. 

There are people making a living writing books and teaching classes on Photoshop, so yeah.

[longjohn]

55 minutes ago, Bill_Walker said:

There are people making a living writing books and teaching classes on Photoshop, so yeah.

I’ve been stalling on upgrading to the newest OS because they switched to 64bit and my current PS CS6 (no monthly subscription fee) is 32bit. I understand there will be no compatibility. Ugh

 

so we’ll see you in dv?

[Bill_Walker]

Yeah, the upgrade woes are a bitch.  Damned if you, damned if you don't.

 

No DVD for me this year, alas.  Maybe next year.