Both of those pictures were saved with the sRGB profile, and they contain different pixel values. It's normal they look different. When opened on a color managed app, you should see them as you saw them when you exported them in Darktable.
The display profile in Darktable should always be your system display profile. That's why you calibrate your monitor. I can't think of a use for a different value. When you export a image in sRGB, you expect the destination display (in which the image is to be seen) to be calibrated in that color space (CRT monitors should be close to it), or at least adapted to the display profile when it's to be displayed. That's what gimp does if it has color management enabled. That's what Chrome doesn't seem to do on linux (or at least in my linux :). BTW, when you change between display profile and sRGB, you see differences because your display is not calibrated to sRGB. In theory, you could generate an ICC profile for your monitor targeting sRGB, so that displaying a sRGB image without color management would result in the right colors used. But that would reduce your display gammut (if sRGB is only a subset of its possible gammut, and it seems it is, are yours is a wide gammut display). If you did that, switching the display profile between sRGB and the system one would show minimal visual differences. Julian. On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:17 AM, Timo Mohnani <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Here is an example of the situation: > > sRGBProfile_IMG_8438 > -http://lovenlaughter.smugmug.com/NotForPublic/Photography/Posted-Images/i-bp9cjxj/0/X3/sRGBProfile_IMG_8438-O.jpg > > SystemDispProfile_IMG_8438 > -http://lovenlaughter.smugmug.com/NotForPublic/Photography/Posted-Images/i-kmLM6jr/0/X3/SystemDispProfile_IMG_8438-O.jpg > > I won't be able to provide xmps until monday. > > Timo > > > On 2 August 2013 11:11, johannes hanika <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> do you have a sample image + xmp so i can check on my machine? >> >> >> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Timo Mohnani <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Chrome has been color managed since version 22. We are currently on >>> version 28. >>> >>> Timo >>> >>> >>> On 2 August 2013 10:29, johannes hanika <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> oh, chrome is color managed now? i would tend to think if chrome and >>>> firefox look the same you don't have color management setup. >>>> >>>> j. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Aug 2, 2013 at 8:38 AM, Timo Mohnani <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Dear Johannes, >>>>> >>>>> I have looked at the images in Digikam, Gwenview and Showfoto. My >>>>> screen is calibrated last week and I have my profile activated in KDE. On >>>>> top of that I have uploaded the images to the internet and viewed them >>>>> with >>>>> Chrome and Firefox. Other people have done the same on other computers. I >>>>> even asked one other DT user to carry out a similar process on his own >>>>> images and he too ended up with the same result. The sRGB are warmer. >>>>> >>>>> There is something more to this....... >>>>> >>>>> Timo >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 2 August 2013 09:29, johannes hanika <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> you're probably looking at your exported images from a non-color >>>>>> managed application. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 9:56 PM, Timo Mohnani <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is it normal that when you export with the sRGB color profile, the >>>>>>> resulting jpg has a slightly red tint (or warm) color to it compared to >>>>>>> the >>>>>>> edited image in the darkroom? This happens to all my images. To make my >>>>>>> images work I need to go to the "output color profile" module and choose >>>>>>> sRGB as my display profile. But this kind of defeats the purpose of >>>>>>> having a >>>>>>> wide-gamut screen. >>>>>>> I would assume that I would be able to edit my images using my >>>>>>> calibrated screen profile and then when exporting with sRGB I would end >>>>>>> up >>>>>>> with an image that was quite similar. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Timo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >>>>>>> Get your SQL database under version control now! >>>>>>> Version control is standard for application code, but databases >>>>>>> havent >>>>>>> caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under >>>>>>> version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find >>>>>>> out. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Darktable-users mailing list >>>>>>> [email protected] >>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Get your SQL database under version control now! > Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent > caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under > version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Darktable-users mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users > -- http://www.julianmenendez.es ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your SQL database under version control now! Version control is standard for application code, but databases havent caught up. So what steps can you take to put your SQL databases under version control? Why should you start doing it? Read more to find out. http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=49501711&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Darktable-users mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/darktable-users
