It does seem to me You have problems with color profiles.
What color profile was embedded in your image from the camera?
sRGB or RGB?
Did You process RAW or use the Jpeg straight from the camera?
If, like me You use a Mac, You should be aware that the Colorsync
engine manages the appareance of even the images displayed in Safari.
This does mean the image looks different to You than on a PC without
colour management or simply another browse, to the best of my knowledge
Safari is still the only browser supporting color profiles, so, You can
download Firefox, or Camino, and display the image on this browser to
see if it does diplay differently, You can find them at:
http://www.mozilla.org/
RapidWeaver is a great little program, and is not to blame for this.
There are two ways to get rid of this, first add code on Your page
telling the browser not to use the embedded color profile, of simply be
sure to turn off Photoshop color management, and save whitout embedded
color profile, by unchecking the flag in the save as dialog.
Be aware that even in this case, having the mac by default different
color temperatures and monitor gamma from a PC, the images will look
brighter on Your screen than on a PC.
Simply cannot understand why some people keep using PCs... ;-)
To get an idea, if You use safari, please check the difference:
http://not.contaxg.com/document.php?id=8638
this is an image I posted on a site, since the site engine
automatically resized it, the image did loose the embedded color
profile,
click on the image to see it real size, and see how hues and saturation
change.
If You have Firefox, open the link and click on the image: colour and
saturation will not change.
If You want to know more, launch the Colorsync Utility, You can find it
in Applications\Utilities, or simply spotlight the words, and launch
the application help, if You haven't done this before, You simply will
be amazed from the power concealed under the bonnet of OS X, You can
even use it to compare color profiles!
Hope this helps.
BTW, saturation may sure not be good for skin tones, but I really like
it when it comes to airplanes and sky, I like these shots very much.
Alfredo
On Aug 30, 2005, at 7:50 AM, Chris Barker wrote:
>
> Thanks Gary. The photos on the web have turned out much more
> saturated than they were in PS. The software for making a website
> (RapidWeaver from realmacsoftware) seems to have changed the curves
> or something. Diana Britten, for instance, is pretty suntanned, but
> not ruddy!.
>
> The camouflaged AN-2 is based at Little Gransden and the owner (Mark
> Jefferies, an aerobatic ace) has tarted it out inside with Connolly
> leather etc ... as executive transport. But it uses 200l/hr in the
> cruise, so the sums might not be too good...
>
> The AN-2s took off in formation and did a formation display for a few
> minutes! That was an even stranger sight...
>
> Chris
> ~~ >-)-
> C M I Barker
> Cambridgeshire, Great Britain.
> +44 (0)7092 251126
> www.threeshoes.co.uk
> homepage.mac.com/zuiko
>
>
> On 30 Aug 2005, at 00:34, Gary Edwards wrote:
>
>> Looks like a beautiful day for an airshow, Chris. And a
>> Staggerwing! A 195
>> is nice but a Staggerwing is the most beautiful civil machine of
>> that era.
>>
>> Isn't the AN-2 bizarre to watch in the air? - huge, ugly, and
>> incredibly
>> slow. One floated over my office last week turning base for Grand
>> Prairie.
>> It seemed to take forever to get far enough to turn final. Very
>> useful,
>> though. Carries lots of chickens or skydivers.
>>
>> Gary
>>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
___________________________________
Yahoo! Mail: gratis 1GB per i messaggi e allegati da 10MB
http://mail.yahoo.it
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|