Safari for windows! (Why photographers should be using it)
 

Yes!, there is no mistake Apple have produced a version of their web browser (Safari) for Windows.

Take a look at the mangled article in the link to read about the only web browser with ICC colour profile support.

http://blogs.business2.com/apple/200...otographe.html

Safari can be downloaded here

http://www.apple.com/safari/

I have been using it for a week or so and found it much quicker than Opera and slightly (not noticable) faster than Firefox. Colour management is a real bonus!

I have not used Safari for a while, beware, I gave up on it because the gain in speed was achieved in part by not actually downloading to the extent of eg being able to save a page (often useful to keep for reference especially when away from internet access). Will give latest version a whirl as not losing some of the colour would be great....only is it great if hardly anyone else is looking at the same thing? the other snag is that I don't think you can stop/freeze animations, an essential for me (even the burrowing fox!;) )

have been donated a PC for Susan to learn on, but horrified to see how gaudy & orrible my pics are using Firefox:eek:

rapidly downloaded Safari, sigh of relief :) but can't find where one would set ICC profile

help please Stephen or someone

PS having read the link article more slowly and with sick-bag to hand, is the key at ones own end ie to check ICC profile box in save procedure (GraphicConverter), tho in PSE it only gives option to maintain Apple RGB profile (which I have set wherever else possible including DPP where my primary processing takes place). Is this just as good?

I don't think you can set a profile. I believe Safari can read most common profiles just like photoshop does. I have never tested this but you could set an Adobe colour profile in photoshop save as JPEG then open in FireFox where it should look poor. Safari, if it lives up to reputation should display colours just like photoshop.

I think this is precisely the experiment I inadvertently carried out on the PC....in fact doing the same thing with Firefox and Safari in parallel on my powerbook + the original of the posted pic, I find Safari colour is seamless when overlapped with the original and Firefox is faded as I have constantly been puzzled about and attributed to Vbulletin software

All I have to do now is work out how to stop foxes jumping in and out of their burrows on Safari :D

...and then scratch my head about exactly what the majority of WPF members are looking at and commenting on :(

In photoshop the last edit you should perform is 'convert to profile' click Edit -> Convert to profile then select sRGB as the destination space. This will allow non-Safari users to see your images with correct colour.

I am no expert but is my fox jumping out of his den?

I've opened a photo in WPF simultaneously in Firefox, Opera and Safari and compared by swithing between all three.
Firefox and Opera look the same, both a bit darker than Safari on my screen with Safari showing a bit more detail in dark areas, but looking as if lighter areas a bit light.
Can't say which I prefer as images on all three look as if they need some sort of levels tweaking.
Safari text poor as it looks 'bold' and a bit fuzzy and not very pleasant to look at. Safari also takes the longest to load.

I'm not sure that I get the colour management benefit that safari brings. After all it sort of standard that images for web are saved in sRGB as the vast majority of users out there will be using a browser without colour management. In fact if you use the PS "save for web" option it strips out the icc profile (I think). So if you are using safari and posting images saved in other than sRBG they will look fine to yourself but horrible to anyone else - what's the point in that:confused:

Chris - not sure what profile that you are saving your pics with - if it is Adobe RGB then these would look flat in a non colour managed environment. I suspect that the "gaudy & orrible pics" are more to do with an improperly calibrated monitor

Oh dear, back to compromise: as I understand it sRGB is more limited than either Adobe RGB and apple RGB. I have the camera set to Adobe RGB and all graphics programmes that have a setting to apple RGB. I think i will stick to that and have accepted that some viewers will be seeing paler version...but from brief tangle with PC monitor, that may not be a bad thing.

Mike: you can set safari script to whatever font and size you like (except as far as I can see PC has only about half of them). On the monitor we have, admittedly cheap, the slightly fuzzed safari at least looks better than the jaggy Firefox. I suspect what you call 'a bit light' is waht is intended, at least by me.

Chris

I think you are missing the point here. As I understand it monitors can not display the whole of the sRBG colour space - LCD/TFT ones more so that CRT, and therefore the greater gamut of the Adobe RGB colour space is wasted when you view on screen - the benefit comes when you produce hard copy. If you stick to posting images in Apple RSB colour space you will need to accept the the majority - not some - of viewers will not see your images as you do on your screen.

That said, the images that you have posted in your gallery in Apple RSB (not sure how this compares with Adobe RGB) look well saturated on my (calibrated) monitor in firefox