# Emailed images and they look desaturated and basically look like crap! Help!



## Drew1992 (Aug 17, 2011)

Yes, this is another colour space question from a frustrated newbie!
I have spent hours(days) PP a photo shoot and attempted to email some finished images to a client(for viewing purposes only) until I can get her the images on disk. Luckily, having had this issue once before but not knowing if it was me or not, I emailed them to myself first as a test. Same thing. Desaturated images and not even close to my finished image in LR3. I even viewed the image on another PC in our house and again it looked desaturated, color a bit different than the desaturated one I viewed on my own PC in MS Outlook, but still looked like junk!

Is this a problem that will always be present since images viewed on various devices will not look the same due to the whole colour space issue with windows, IE, and web browsers that don't support specific colour spaces? Or, is it me?! I am going insane reading all the other posts on here trying to figure it out.

Should I just expect that my many hours and hours of work on images will be wasted if one tries to view them on another person's device that unlike mine, is un-calibrated and then there's the colour space issue again depending on their browser, platform, etc.??? Or, again, is it me?

Here's what my workflow is:

Import into LR3, send to CS5 for some WB and basic edits in ACR, saved the image when it got back into CS5 from ACR, jumped back over to LR for more editing there as well as through Nik Software's Define 2.0, Viveza, Silverefex, etc. Then, jumped back over to CS5 to flatten my images, sharpen via unsharp mask filter and then saved my images again. Went back into LR3 and exported my finished collection to a folder on my desktop via the Exporter "to email" preset. I then inserted my images into my email (MS Outlook) from that folder on the desktop. A lot of steps, I know, but I am still trying to find a workflow using all the different software, filters, etc.

I have LR preferences set up so that my external editing with PS uses sRGB colour space. My ACR is set up (bottom of screen) for sRGB as well. In PS under Edit and Color Settings my Working Space is set to: sRGB IEC 61966-2.1, CMYK: US Web Coated SWOP v2, Settings: North America General Purpose 2, Everything below that is all Preserve Embedded Profiles (I have a wide gamut display that is regularly calibrated via Spyder 3 using the SpectraView II software, I am assuming using those embedded profiles?)
In PS under Edit and Convert to Profile, my Source Space: sRGB IEC 61966-2.1, my Destination Space Profile: Working sRGB-sRGB IEC 61966-2.1, and then under Edit and Assign Profile it is set to: Working SRGB-sRGB IEC 61966-2.1

So, is it me? Do I have something set up wrong? I welcome ANY and ALL feedback! I am going crazy with this!

Thanks again for helping a newbie!


----------



## Garbz (Aug 17, 2011)

Nope you've just confused a working colour space problem and an output colour space problem. Welcome to the wide gamut monitor club. We have shirts, they say "F*@K THIS $H!T" on them. 

Your issue is your issue alone due to not the fact that IE doesn't understand how to render the colours in the file, it's that windows doesn't understand how to render the images on YOUR monitor. Lightroom does. It loads the Monitor profile out of the windows colour management system that was created by SpectraView. IE doesn't do this and just passes data out expecting your monitor to display a perfect sRGB response just like 99.9% of the other monitors in the world. This sounds like situation normal to me, ... except for that bit about not working on the other computer.

Does the other computer have a wide gamut monitor? Is the other computer calibrated? Is the screen set up correctly? I suggest try multiple computers all with non-wide gamut monitors and compare them to the image you see in Lightroom. If they all look desaturated compared to Lightroom then you have a monitor calibration issue, either Lightroom isn't reading the monitor profile (unlikely since the results are different from IE on the same computer), or your colour calibration steps are stuffed (You using factory measurement for your chromaticity source or colour sensor in SpectraView II?).

In any case any of the above could apply to anyone else too. How do you know their monitors are calibrated? How do you know the prints you give them are being viewed under nice light rather than a cheap fluro? Unless you control the process end to end (i.e. display the images to them rather than send them there) you can't ever be sure of your colour situation.


----------



## fokker (Aug 17, 2011)

Your colour space situation is a little over my head, but I'd suggest really simplifying your workflow. Why import to LR3 then export to CS5 to make ACR or WB changes to the file?? Lightroom is basically the best camera raw editor you could ever hope for in terms of speed and ease of use as well as the amount of editing options. It also does sharpening too... The only reason to use CS5 over and above LR is if you are doing complicated editing that requires layers, masks etc.


----------



## Drew1992 (Aug 17, 2011)

Hey Garbz
Where can I get one of those T-shirts!? ;-)

No, the other computer is a laptop. I actually viewed the image (in the email) via 2 other PC's. The one that I have my wide-gamut monitor connected to and work through(laptop that is calibrated with it's own target settings apart from the wide-gamut calibration target settings) and my husband's laptop(un-calibrated). And, the image looked like junk on both of those laptops compared to the image in LR on my wide-gamut monitor.
Yes, I used the factory measurements for the chromaticity source. Is that bad?
I just looked and my monitor is due for another calibration today. It was last calibrated on the 5th of August. I am going to calibrate and see if that helps at all. 

So, do I have my colour space(s) set up correctly in LR, PS, and ACR? I want to edit in sRGB. Is it correct then to use the Working sRGB as my profile in PS?

Ok, that's what I thought. I need to let them view their images on my monitor or encourage my clients to Print my images so that they will see the images as I see them in LR and PS.

Let me know what you think about the above settings/factory measurements, etc.
Thanks again Garbz  You have been soooo very helpful to me!


----------



## IgsEMT (Aug 17, 2011)

Garbz, I want that t-shirt too


----------



## Drew1992 (Aug 17, 2011)

Fokker,

Thanks for your suggestion. I need it.
I guess I could just use LR for my basic edits. I just like the way ACR is set up. But, since I am trying to speed up my PP, maybe I should consider doing more in LR.  I use PS mostly for actions that I have there, and for my output sharpening. I am in LR quite a bit because obviously it is my organizer and so I have a better view overall of what I have to edit, what's next, etc. I also like the collections and the exporting/publishing options. I use Nik Software filters(Viveza, Silverefex, etc) through LR as well as through PS. 
Would you be kind enough to share your workflow with me? I am a newbie and would LOVE to see what other people do during their PP. I am very interested in getting a more efficient, organized, quicker, more of a routine workflow, but I'm not sure how to get there. I think I have so much wonderful software, plug-in's, etc at my fingertips that I'm not sure how to create a workflow while using it all. I welcome yours as well as anyone else's WORKFLOW suggestions. Thanks in advance!


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 17, 2011)

LR raw processing and ACR are the same engine.

I import into LR, doing all basic edits there then export to PS only when needed for bit level work of specific sharpening stuff. 
     All that back and forth you do just confuses the hell out of me.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 18, 2011)

Drew1992 said:


> And, the image looked like junk on both of those laptops compared to the image in LR on my wide-gamut monitor.
> Yes, I used the factory measurements for the chromaticity source. Is that bad?



The factory measurement option was provided for wide gamut monitors to use calibrators that didn't support wide gamuts. It allowed to use the calibrator only to control consistent grey scale throughout the monitor range, but it would not create a profile based on measured results. Your Spyder 3 is perfectly capable of recording the full gamut of the monitor so use that for the chroma source. The Spyder 2 was one of the real problems given it was one of the most popular calibrators when NEC was running their SpectraView line, and it couldn't do wide gamuts. So give the new settings a go and see if it changes something.

One other possibility, (aside from the obvious that no picture really looks good on a laptop screen), is that the image actually has wide gamut colours. Is it a psycho colourful image or a normal picture? If you convert down in colour space to sRGB you'll always lose a bit of colour fidelity. 

Also as Traveler said by others your workflow needs work. LR and ACR are the same program, so much so that if you update Lightroom but not ACR you'll actually get an error if you try to open the file in Photoshop. They have almost identical feature sets as far as editing and Lightroom wraps a huge photo management system around that. Anything you can do in ACR you can do in Lightroom, which is why when you use the "Edit image in Photoshop" option it doesn't even open ACR for you, it simply applies the LR settings through ACR to open the image (hence the warning about missmatched versions).


----------



## Drew1992 (Aug 23, 2011)

Hello Garbz,
So sorry it has taken me so long to reply. Busy weekend, kids starting school this week, etc. But, FINALLY I have some uninterrupted work time! 
I re-calibrated my wide gamut display using the Spyder 3 as my chroma source this time instead of the factory measurements and the images still look very de-saturated via email. Ugh!

I'm not sure what you mean by the image actually having wide gamut colours? I edit in the sRGB colour space in PS. What is a psycho colourful image? I'm lost on this one!

Ah, I did not realize that LR and ACR were about the same. That will save me some time, that's for sure!  So, now I understand why I couldn't just open an image up in ACR directly from LR. I tried it and tried to figure it out and was so lost! If I skip ACR and just use LR  I will shorten the process.  Is there anything in ACR that can't be done in LR other than preserving the pixels of an image after cropping via saving as a DNG? Just wondering...

Do you have a suggested workflow for me? I like to use Nik Software for editing just parts of an image(via Viveza) and for the automatic option for noise reduction in Define 2.0, as well as for getting creative in Silver Efex and Color Efex. I use PS for actions that I have saved there, and for the final sharpening via unsharp mask. Of course, I use LR to import, organize, do my picks, collections, publishing, etc. I'd LOVE your opinion on a efficient workflow that I could try. Also, have you ever used onOne software? What do you think? I've never used it.

Thanks again!


----------



## Drew1992 (Aug 23, 2011)

Garbz,

I tried something different when emailing images. Instead of INSERTING the images into the actual email, I ATTACHED them to the email and when I opened them in another email account I have and opened them on a different PC than the one I edit on(a laptop) the images were much more saturated. Not like they look in LR or PS, but they looked much better even though they were viewed in Windows Picture Viewer. So, I got a look at what my images will look like if the average person viewed them via email with Windows Picture Viewer. Not wonderful, but much better than the de-saturated version of the images I originally INSERTED into an email.


----------



## Garbz (Aug 25, 2011)

Yes well outlook (word) doesn't support colour management and Windows picture viewer does. But just to confirm that this isn't a profile issue can you open the exported picture for me:

Save the picture to somewhere on your computer as in your last step as if you're about to attach it to an email.
Open this image in photoshop.
Now tell me the EXACT title bar of the image in photoshop. Be sure to note the correct order of any * or ) you may see in the (RGB/8)* bit at the end of the title bar.


----------



## Drew1992 (Aug 28, 2011)

Garbz,

Ok, I exported a collection of images(for email & web use) to my desktop and opened one of the images with Mini Bridge. The title bar reads my filename and then looks exactly like this: (RGB/8)


----------



## The_Traveler (Aug 28, 2011)

sorry stupid remark


----------



## Garbz (Aug 29, 2011)

Drew1992 said:


> Garbz,
> 
> Ok, I exported a collection of images(for email & web use) to my desktop and opened one of the images with Mini Bridge. The title bar reads my filename and then looks exactly like this: (RGB/8)



Ok just checking. A * after the 8 would indicate a non-standard colour space. THe differences you see are due to software not using the colour profile on your screen. Trust Photoshop's results, but realise that other people won't have colourmanagement in any way shape or form. You can't trust how people will view your photos unfortunately.


----------



## Drew1992 (Oct 18, 2011)

Thanks Garbz! I didn't realize you responded to this since it never came through to my email as a notification. Yeah, it sure stinks that our work gets viewed on different devices(like a cell phone that has been used to check email and then upload your work via cell phone to the web) but, I guess there's no way around it.


----------



## wizard_of_aus (Jan 15, 2012)

I have found the same problems when sending photographs through emails. I process my shots in photoshop Elements 10 and yet, what I see on my screen and what pops up when I add it to an email are completely different.Even though, they are both being viewed on the same monitor. The shot in the email is desaturated and looks "dead" (colour and vibrance missing).

The problem with this is that I have a photo competition coming up and the only way to submit shots is via email and, I am concerned that the judges aren't going to see what I am seeing in Elements. At first I thought that the problem may have been my monitor but after printing the suspect photo's (both on my machine and at a commercial outlet) they were pretty close to the mark. And yet, I find that the problem still persists with the bloody emails.

I can't afford to rip any more hair out but this is really starting to concern me.


----------



## MLeeK (Jan 15, 2012)

If your monitor is not calibrated and you are using a colorspace other than sRGB the images you submit will look nothing like what is on your computer. 
The mozilla suite of software is color managed and will always render your images correctly if you are using sRGB.


----------

