Check out the rest of Alexey Titarenko’s City Of Shadows
Check out the rest of Alexey Titarenko’s City Of Shadows
Aside from all the glorious edtech rambling debates, I am seeing ds106 as really an exercise in unlocking and cultivating our personal creativity. It is a slow process for me, which saddens me, but I am still determined to work through this and emerge on the other side with some creative energy flowing. I am still determined to step up my game.
I stuck with the last week of daily shoots and I think that today I really started to reconnect with some joy of photography. Normally I come up with a photo worthy of sharing at a rate of one every two weeks. This is pushing me out of comfort zone. It is also forcing me to wake up and look around. I like it.
Here is my latest photo for the daily shoot on the topic of plugs:
You can see all of my photos for this week over at flickr, or in the slideshow below.
Off-color remarks
Here’s what’s keeping me an active Firefox user, though: Chrome’s lack of support for color profiles.Most images on the Web are encoded with a color scheme called sRGB, but there are others out there including AdobeRGB and Microsoft’s scRGB that can show a much broader range of colors. I’m a photography buff with an eensy-weensy photo business, so I prefer images to look as good as possible on the Web.
Apple’s Safari was the pioneer for color management, and Firefox added color profile support with version 3.0 if users manually enable it. With version 3.1, Firefox applies color profiles for images that have been tagged with one. As a result, images on my high-gamut monitor at home look fine in Firefox, but in Chrome they’re hideously garish and oversaturated. It’s a showstopper for me when I’m doing anything photo-related on the Web.
I recognize my color preference is at odds with Google’s performance push. Mozilla programmers found that supporting color profiles slowed Firefox 20 percent to 30 percent, though they reduced that number 4 percent to 5 percent with testing. Eventually, to get it lower, they went with a third way, applying color profiles only for tagged images, which caused only a 1 percent performance hit.
But Google hasn’t even gotten to the stage of evaluating performance effects. “I don’t see how any sites could depend on this feature if it’s missing/disabled for 90 percent of users,” said Chrome Program Manager Mark Larson in a response to a request to add color management to Chrome, referring to the fact that color management is missing in Internet Explorer and not enabled yet in mainstream Firefox. “I’m all for it, but it’s definitely not a release priority.”
Here is a screenshot of my latest picture for daily shoot shown in safari and chrome. The assignment was earth tones. When viewed in Chrome, the photo is a red and over saturated. Not quite as earth toney as I intended. These are the kind of details that make me want to stay with safari. It is also why I might just stick with black and white for my web photography. Beyond that, what am I supposed to do? Stick with print-only? iPad only? Oh well, colors are a pain in the butt anyway. And yes, the screenshot below will look different based on what browser you view it in, but you can at least see a difference.
update:
After restarting Chrome, the image looks the same now. Not sure what is happening. Not only does the image in flickr look okay, but the image on my desktop (which previously was over saturated when viewed in chrome) now looks fine in chrome. Guess it was a temporary glitch in my chrome?
I finally decided to partake in the Daily Shoot. I have been watching it since its inception, but never overcame the inertia to give it a try. Maybe seeing The Revered get on board pushed me over the edge. Don’t know how much I’ll keep this up, but I was looking for some ideas to get shooting and this seemed good. Having limits help creativity without a doubt.
Here are my first two photos for daily shoot. Click on them to find out about that day’s assignment.