[css-d] Strategy to Circumvent Incomplete Browser Color Management
Color management in browsers is a crap shoot. Only Firefox allows the
specific interpretation of CSS/element color as sRGB (and that's with a
non-default setting); so for the most part, CSS/element color on
wide-gamut displays look hideously oversaturated.
This got me wondering about an alternative approach to setting
background-color: that is, to set background colors with an sRGB-tagged,
one-pixel image set to cover.
EXAMPLE:
.myColoredElement {
background-color:rgb(255,0,0); /* redundant, but included; would
not be color-managed in most browsers */
background-image:url(PATH_TO_1_PIXEL_PNG_OF_sRGB-TAGGED_RED.png);
background-size:cover;
}
Any thoughts?
___
RICK GORDON
EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING
___
WWW: http://www.shelterpub.com
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Strategy to Circumvent Incomplete Browser Color Management
Oh, well.
A test in Chrome v43 (Mac) showed that the color profile -- even if
tagged -- is not recognized in my background-image, regardless of
whether the image is saved as .png or .jpg (and even if background-color
is disabled).
Rick Gordon
-
On 7/16/15, 1:41 PM, Rick Gordon wrote:
Color management in browsers is a crap shoot. Only Firefox allows the
specific interpretation of CSS/element color as sRGB (and that's with
a non-default setting); so for the most part, CSS/element color on
wide-gamut displays look hideously oversaturated.
This got me wondering about an alternative approach to setting
background-color: that is, to set background colors with an
sRGB-tagged, one-pixel image set to cover.
EXAMPLE:
.myColoredElement {
background-color:rgb(255,0,0); /* redundant, but included; would
not be color-managed in most browsers */
background-image:url(PATH_TO_1_PIXEL_PNG_OF_sRGB-TAGGED_RED.png);
background-size:cover;
}
Any thoughts?
___
RICK GORDON
EMERALD VALLEY GRAPHICS AND CONSULTING
___
WWW: http://www.shelterpub.com
__
css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org]
http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d
List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/
List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html
Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
Re: [css-d] Strategy to Circumvent Incomplete Browser Color Management
On 7/16/15 2:12 PM, Rick Gordon wrote: Oh, well. A test in Chrome v43 (Mac) showed that the color profile -- even if tagged -- is not recognized in my background-image, regardless of whether the image is saved as .png or .jpg (and even if background-color is disabled). Rick Gordon - On 7/16/15, 1:41 PM, Rick Gordon wrote: Color management in browsers is a crap shoot. Only Firefox allows the specific interpretation of CSS/element color as sRGB (and that's with a non-default setting); so for the most part, CSS/element color on wide-gamut displays look hideously oversaturated. This got me wondering about an alternative approach to setting background-color: that is, to set background colors with an sRGB-tagged, one-pixel image set to cover. Yup! Using this test, Chrome (Mac) does fail the ICC v4 profile test. Safari 8 on my Mac, though, does pass all tests. :) http://cameratico.com/tools/web-browser-color-management-test/ -- Cordially, David __ css-discuss [css-d@lists.css-discuss.org] http://www.css-discuss.org/mailman/listinfo/css-d List wiki/FAQ -- http://css-discuss.incutio.com/ List policies -- http://css-discuss.org/policies.html Supported by evolt.org -- http://www.evolt.org/help_support_evolt/
