請問現在、在市場上有那個Web Browser是會用畫片里的ICC Profile?
OK, back to English: Anyone know which browser out there are able to use utilize the embedded ICC profile in web images? As I'm aware of the only ones are MSIE on Mac and MSIE on Mac OS X...
Can someone enlighten me on this issue?
ICC aware web browser?
版主: ross_tt、bryanchang、digdog、chester
That's what I'm doing now... anyway managed to dig out something from ColorSync mailing list achive:CD 寫:小弟會建議您將要放上網路的bitmap檔案均轉換成sRGB Color Space Profiles(不須嵌入)，在大多數情況下應該會有令人滿意的結果。另外，要再完美的話，反而是PC和Mac作業系統預設Gamma值的差異是否列入考量了。
..unless the majority of visitors are connecting from macs, convert pictures to sRGB, no need to include profiles.
That way Win users (no Colorsync savy browser available at all for that platform) see colors like intended, Mac user see dark pictures, and Mac IE users with color correction enabled again see colors like intended -- Mac IE color correction defaults to assume sRGB.
I doubt any more effort onto color correction for web publishing purposes would be reasonable -- estimating 90% of displays aren't corrected at all.
More info:
OmniWeb & Safari (v0.8.2 onwards) do aware of ICC profile
OmniWeb & Safari (v0.8.2 onwards) do aware of ICC profile
Safari 0.8.2 does. JPEG and TIFF, both RGB and CMYK are supported. Same as Mail and Preview. For some reason the iPhoto team appears to be out to lunch because they just can't get it right. It requires quitting and relaunching before it sees profiles, and hoses CMYK images altogether. Chimera ignores embedded profiles.
There is an HTML convention to reference standalone ICC profiles, that way you can have 20 images on a page using 3 different profiles for example, and for the browser to only download those three profiles once. If they were embedded, they'd be downloaded a total of 20 times. I don't know much about HTML so I don't know if this is something that can be done on a per image or per page basis.
In the absence of an embedded profile, Omniweb uses sRGB as the assumed source profile. IE will also do this. I'm not sure if Safari makes a similar assumption.