different colors ooc and generated jpg from raw

[pel9]

Hi
I struggle to find why xnview mp show different color (saturation) in ooc (out of camera) and generated jpg from raw (using the camera manufacturer software). In this case it is the Olympus em5iii and the OM Workspace. Since the software tool uses the same jpg engine as the camera intern engine.
Only xnview mp shows different saturation, while firefox and other image viewers shows them the same. Does anybody have a clue? I really like the version of ooc in xnview mp, but do not know what this kind of ooc images are presented different in xnview mp

I attached from both a 50% decreased version (using xnview mp), since the forum does not allow the original files due to the sizes.

Again: you will not see any difference right now, if you are using firefox (i do not have other browsers)

[pel9]

update: looks like imageglass produces the same "error".
But in imageglass I can turn on the color profile (of my monitor) to "apply also for images without embedded color profile". If I turn it on, the image from the ooc looks like the OM WS generated one.
As a result: the ooc does not embed the color profile, but the OM WS does. This means that the OM WS is the "real" one

Thanks for reading.

[xnview]

Sorry but your problem is that viewing these 2 jpeg files into XnViewMP shows difference?

[pel9]

Yes.

Thank you for taking time and reading.

I found the difference between both files: in the ooc there is no icc profile embedded, but in the generated jpg from raw the icc profile is embedded. In both exif information the sRGB is named as profile.

Xnview MP uses the monitor icc profile (from the icc profile management), if there is no icc profile in the picture embedded. Therefore I got different color rendering. My monitor is calibrated, and if I turn off ("Use ICC Profile of Monitor...") in the general / icc than both are displayed the same way.

I do not know if it is a bug or a feature.

[xnview]

with ICC on, i have same rendering. None of jpeg has embedded icc profile...

[pel9]

as mentioned I used the batch convert of xnview mp to reduce the size to 50%. This means, that the icc profile will not taken over.

Here I uploaded the original files:



If bb code does not do, here as html inks:
https://ibb.co/cv5ZW7F
https://ibb.co/NT3zrxk

Please try with those again.

[xnview]

sorry but these files have no EXIF/ICC Profile

[pel9]

Did you download the files using the download button?

20231105_screenshot2.JPG

I just downloaded those into my Download folder and used exiftool to look if they have icc profile embedded. As said: The ooc image does not, but the OM WS generated jpg from raw does:

20231105_screenshot.JPG

[xnview]

sorry now it's good...
Ok so one file has ICC profile, and other none. I don't see any difference (with Settings>ICC enabled)
Could you post a screenshot?

[pel9]

that is wired. Here as requested.
First my setting:

20231105_screenshot3.JPG

I opened two sessions to put the pictures side by side. This is the screenshot using the snipping tool:

20231105_screenshot4.JPG

update:
I just notice, that the image provider alters the files
Screenshot4 is taken with the originals from my hard drive, not the downloaded ones.

Please use the originals provided here. You should get the same result as in screenshot4:
https://file.io/WrqKrs92XR0G
I also included the ORF file (which is probably not needed) (all files will be deleted after 2 weeks)

[xnview]

i have not that, all 2 files are the same in first in your screenshot... Is it 1.6.1?

[pel9]

Yes, I use the latest. 1.6.1
But this was also in previous versions.

I did not get your first sentence. Do you mean you do not see any difference in the screenshot where I put both pictures side by side.

[pel9]

to whom it may concern.
I found the root of the problem which is described here:
http://www.gballard.net/psd/go_live_pag ... files.html

So. At least I am aware why I get different color rendering, and I know what color rendering is correct (unfortunately not the one, with no icc profile embedded)

edit:
this bug shows the problem
https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1639584

To my understanding every image which is not tagged, should map to sRGB.

Another webpage regarding the problem:
https://www.nedmartin.org/v3/public/col ... -test.html

[xnview]

I did not get your first sentence. Do you mean you do not see any difference in the screenshot where I put both pictures side by side.

I don't see difference

Clipboard-1.jpg

[pel9]

I set "RGB profile used whem embedded profile doesn't exist" to "sRGB" and everything looks the same now.

This should be default IMHO.

My Olympus and Canon cameras (5 cameras) out of camera jpg images are all without embedded profile, which means per default they are all falsely rendered. (This happens if you have a fully calibrated monitor/display which can represent a huge amount of color range, where an icc profile is generated as used system wide.)

Took me a lot of time to figure it out, but learned a lot, too.

Thank you for your time and interest.