Color calibration – not for the night owl

Colors.  Who knew they could be so tricky.

One night, a week or so ago, I was making a print of this photo on my photo printer, a Canon iP6600D:

Simple enough, you’d think.  I even was using Canon’s specific ICC profiles, based on these instructions for Photoshop, for my specific printer and paper combination.

The colors weren’t even close.  The white was white, but the green background was very yellow-ish brown…to the point that it pretty much killed the picture.  I held the print up to the screen (I was using a Dell 2001FP display), and the print was much more yellow/brown than the nice green-ish color on the screen.

Hmm.  Maybe the printer profiles were off, I thought.  So I uploaded a copy to ritzpix.com, and the next day I picked up the print at a Wolf Camera store near my office, after asking them to turn off all of their auto-levels and color correction.  I took the picture home that night, and compared it to the screen and the other print…it, too, was very yellow-ish brown, nothing like the screen.  It was actually pretty close in color to the print I made on my own printer.

Well, it must be that my monitor needs to be calibrated, I thought.  No problem.  The next day after work, I stopped and picked up a ColorVision ColorPlus colorimeter for monitor calibration.  Got home that night, ran through the setup and calibration, looked the before/after on the screen (there is a button you can press at the end of the calibration to do this), and saw that there was indeed a difference…although it was subtle.

So then I made another print of the photo above.  Why, exactly, I wasn’t sure…but maybe there was some kind of interaction between the monitor and printer ICC profiles, right?  Well, I held the new print up to the screen, and it was pretty much the same old yellowish-brown, compared to the nice green on the screen.  Crap.

Two more calibrations, and 5 more prints, and still no love.  I did discover the “rendering intent” feature in Photoshop, which is a very nice tool to know (had to do some research, but I think I understand what it does now), and that affected the output colors quite a bit…but not enough to get it close to what I saw on the screen.  Sigh.

About now, it’s about midnight, and I’m ready to punt on the whole thing.  The 2001FP has independent RGB gain controls, and I’m thinking I can eyeball this thing better than the colorimeter can do.  So I download and print Smugmug’s calibration print.  Using that, and my own print of the photo above, I adjusted the gains on the monitor until it just about matched.  Woo-hoo!  Or so I thought.  The one thing I noticed after doing this is all of my windows were kind of reddish where they used to be white…kind of annoying for reading your email.  But at 1:00 in the morning, I no longer cared too much, and went to bed.

The next morning, I was quickly checking my email (yes, I know), and the reddish color everywhere was really pronounced – and really annoying.  Annoying enough that I reset the monitor back to its default settings, which were the same settings that I used when running the calibration the night before…so we were now back to the calibrated settings.  Ahh, the email window looked white again.  Whew!

Just for giggles, I opened Photoshop and pulled up the photo again.  Not sure why…just seemed like the thing to do at the time.  Ahh, nice and green.  I reached over and grabbed one of the prints I had made the night before, and held it up to the screen.  Man, this looks…

…good?

The colors matched almost perfectly.  WTF?

Turns out it was the light in the room.  Under daylight conditions, during the day, the colors on the print look almost exactly like the screen.  But at night, with my “regular” incandescent lighting, the prints look different.  WAY different.

Sheesh…there went 4 hours I’m never going to get back…but in the glass-is-half-full department, I won’t soon forget the effects of different-colored light.  And hey, turns out my monitor is calibrated pretty darn well now. :-)

Full-spectrum lighting, here I come!  Either that, or leave work earlier when it’s still daylight… ;-)

Beta, beta, everywhere!

This is an exciting first few months of the year for NewsGator and RSS.  Today, NewsGator Outlook edition 2.6 beta 1 was released…see this forum post for more information.  It includes support for clippings sync (the first application in our family to include this!), podcasting (with the super-cool FeedStation), and lots more.

A couple of weeks ago, we rolled out FeedDemon 2.0 beta 1 (see Nick Bradbury’s post on the topic), with some pretty radical changes including complete sync with NewsGator Online.

And last but not least, we have internal builds of NetNewsWire that also sync with NewsGator Online; a few lucky folks got to see this live at MacWorld.  We expect to have a beta release available in the next few weeks.

The coolest part?  As of these three releases, you can use any client you want, on any platform you want – and your subscriptions and content will be seamlessly sync’d between them, and to NewsGator Online.  I’ve personally been using all three clients and the online system for quite some time now, and it’s been smooth as silk.

A quick warning – don’t install the beta of any of these products unless you understand what you’re getting into.  It’s not done – that’s why it’s a beta.  Stuff will break.  Your dog might get sick.  Your car might quit.  But if you’re up for it, give it a shot – you’ll get an early look at the future of these products, and we would LOVE to hear your feedback!

Adobe Camera Raw and Nikon D200

Looks like the new ACR is available, which includes support for D200 RAW files.  It’s not actually on the ACR site yet, but it’s on Adobe’s public FTP server:

ftp://ftp.adobe.com/pub/adobe/photoshop/cameraraw/win/3.x/  (windows)

ftp://ftp.adobe.com/pub/adobe/photoshop/cameraraw/mac/3.x/ (mac)

Woo-hoo!  It was getting a little painful copying to a Mac, converting to DNG with Lightroom, back to windows, and processing using Bridge/ACR/CS2. :-)

[source: dpreview forums]

Image aggregator prototype

The other night, on the way home, an idea came to me…so I pulled up my development environment and decided to write some code.  I think my terrified development team is probably locking me out of the source control systems as we speak… ;-)

My thought was this.  I’m a visual person, and a lot of the feeds I subscribe to have images in the posts.  If I could see all of those images together, I could make some quick decisions about what I want to read now, vs. what I will read later.  And thus was born the image aggregator.

Take a look for yourself – click here, and use your NewsGator Online username/password.

If you’re one of those types who is completely caught up with all of your unread feeds, you won’t see anything.  But if you have unread stuff, you’ll see a compilation of all of the images in your unread posts.  If you click on one, that post will get marked as read in NG/Online, and you’ll get linked out to the post.

Here’s an example of what I see for my own account (click for larger version):

It lets me get an idea, at a glance, of what’s available to read.

This is obviously an EARLY prototype of something, which may or may not see the light of day…but I think it’s an interesting concept.  Any thoughts from you about it?  Useful or no?

Aside: this was all written using the public NewsGator Online API.

Drag and drop feeds!

A week or so ago, we loaded a cool new feature in NewsGator Online…and I wanted to let you know about it in case you haven’t had a chance to look at it.

NewsGator Online provides a hierarchical folder stucture for you to organize your feeds, and it provides a “organize folders” function so you can arrange them how you wish.  This worked, and we actually had a lot of customers praise this “organize folders” page versus what some other tools are doing.

But now we’ve gone one better.  The way I figure it, if you just want to move a couple of feeds around, you don’t want to have to go to a whole other page…you just want to drag them around.  So now you can!  Take a look:

This shows me dragging a feed into the “NG blogs” folder.  Nothing to learn, nothing to think about…just drag it in there.  Unsubscribe, rename, and more are in the right-click menu on each feed/folder:

So anyway, take a look, and let us know what you think…we have a lot more coming for you soon!  And NewsGator Outlook edition, FeedDemon, and NetNewsWire are all nearing new releases…and after using all of them over the last few weeks, I can tell you that the synchronization and usability story is awesome.  More to come!

No-index flag for feeds

At the RSS Industry Night Roundtable (thanks Rok for setting this up), most of the discussion centered around individualized RSS, including both truly individual feeds and also feeds that contain instrumentation for metrics gathering.  Both kinds of feeds exist in the wild today, and both cause some problems for hosted aggregators like Yahoo!, NewsGator, and others, and feed search engines (Technorati, Feedster, NewsGator, and others).

In both cases, we have a situation where we have a number of independent feeds, which all contain the same or similar content.  Some of the content may not be intended for public consumption (for example, it might have the user’s name in it as a personalized message), and other content may be duplicated but slightly different (think per-feed marked-up URL’s used for click-through tracking).

We need a way to avoid indexing this data.  [aside: actually, other publishers have reasons for not wanting their content indexed as well – this solution will cover this third case also]  Today, if you want Yahoo! to stop indexing your feeds, you call them and they mark your domain as such.  If you want NewsGator to stop indexing, you call us and we mark your domain.  And so on…which turns into a long list of calls you need to make. :-)  At the industry meeting the other night, nearly everyone in the room agreed we needed a no-index indicator.

So here’s a proposal. Let’s kick it around and hammer something out quickly.

<rss version=”2.0″ xmlns:r=”urn:anzu-industry-meeting-2005-12″>
  <channel>
    <title>My Feed</title>
    …
    <r:index allowIndex=”false” />
 
    <item>
      <title>My article</title>
      …
      <r:index allowIndex=”false” />  *** see note below
    </item>

This shows an “index” element at the feed level, which controls index-ability for the entire feed.  If the element is not present, allowIndex is implied to be true.

I also show an item-level “index” element (***), which could specify the index-ability settings for a specific item.  I’m less sure about this one…but at the meeting, Eric Hayes at Attensa mentioned it, so I put it in for discussion.  I’d love to hear some thoughts about this one, including some use cases.

Implied behavior when a feed like this is encountered would be to a) not index the content, and potentially b) don’t archive the content if you normally do archive content.

So anyway…this is all pretty simple, and it solves an immediate problem that the whole industry is seeing.  Please comment, either here or on your own blog (add a trackback), and let’s see if we can agree on something quickly.

Does anyone recognize these folks?

When I was out in Santa Monica a few weeks ago, there was a film crew working on the Promenade. These are pictures of the actor and actress that were doing the scene:

It could have been a movie, TV, or commercial…not sure. They appeared to be using film, rather than digital, if that gives anyone a hint. I’d love to know who they are – I’m afraid I might have a great story, and not know it! :-)

NewsGator Enterprise Server review

This is the first full-length review of NewsGator Enterprise Server that I’ve seen.  Lots of screenshots (more than you can see on the NewsGator web site, actually), and lots of detailed information about setting up and using the product.

Newsgator Enterprise Server comes with a very good solution covering these requirements. With its ability to synchronise RSS feeds between Microsoft Exchange mailboxes and its own database I was able to have my preferred “Must Read” feeds organised in folders and have Exchange ActiveSync sending this information OTA (over the air) to my Windows Mobile devices.

There’s even a picture of the distribution CD and manuals, and a cool NewsGator mousepad that I didn’t realize we shipped with the product. :-)

Read the review here at Geekzone.

Review – Smugmug

And now we come to Smugmug, the last photo-sharing site in my series. A bunch of folks in the dpreview forums seem to use them, so I thought I’d take a look.

I had to put in my credit card to get a trial account.  Not a problem for me, I’ll generally do this with reputable sites that have folks recommending them.  So a few minutes later, I had a “standard” account set up.

Here’s my site on Smugmug.

The standard account is $29.95/yr, and lots of people will give you a link to get $5 off, so it’s basically $24.95/yr.  Unlimited storage, and 4GB/mo of download capacity.  Hmm…it’s hard to put that in perspective, but if I’m serving up more than 4GB/mo, hopefully I’m in a position to be happy about it and pay more. :-)

I like that I can organize photos into galleries, and surface those galleries very obviously on the front page.  No problem telling people about it – “go to gregr.smugmug.com and check out my washington, dc pictures”.  I can even control the ordering of galleries on the page, and also ordering of photos within the galleries. You can also group on the front page by category, and show galleries within their categories.  All in all, quite a bit of flexibility.

Password-protection is available, and is very easy to use.  I have one gallery on my site that’s password protected, and you just need the password to access it.  It’s not exactly high-grade security, but I’m also not trying to protect blueprints of a bank vault.  If something needs super-secure protection, I probably wouldn’t put it on a public site to begin with.

EXIF information is optionally exposed for every photo, and displays a popup.  I’m not totally thrilled with the popup, but it works and I can live with it.  For some reason, this site also shows shutter speeds in a very strange way – for this photo, shutter speed is displayed as “0.0062s (10/1600)”.  Come on…couldn’t you just say 1/160, and save me having to figure it out myself?  Zoto does the same thing, and I just don’t get it.

There are also some strange EXIF problems.  This picture shows a shutter speed of 15.625 sec, which I can promise you is not accurate.  I sent a note to their support alias to this effect…and WOW.  Two separate folks wrote back to me within 10 minutes.  This on a Sunday – very cool.  It wasn’t perfect, though…Andy from Smugmug said the camera writes inconsistent info so they can’t fix it (doubtful, as Windows XP can display the correct info for this exact same file), and Ben said it looked strange and he’d pass it along to their developers.  I chose to listen to Ben. :-)  (one week later, haven’t heard anything, problem still appears).

Smugmug also supports tags (they call them keywords), and they’re pretty easy to manage.  I couldn’t enter “night” as a keyword – it just wouldn’t show up.  One more note to support, another response in about 5 minutes saying it was probably an erroneous entry on a blacklist, and he’d have someone take care of it.  (one week later, problem is still there).

I like the overall look/feel.  There are multiple styles you can use, and the site is easy to navigate for both the owner and visitors.  The only nitpicky thing that comes to mind is the page numbers on the gallery pages – it’s a little hard to find, and watching over peoples’ shoulders, I notice that not everyone sees them, and they assume there’s only one page of photos.  Small thing, but there is probably a way to make that stand out a bit more.

I like the geo-tagging capabilities (via Google Earth) – it’s fun to see my photos on a map.  My only suggestion (sent to support guys) was to make it so I can tag multiple photos with one location all at once.  So once I figure out the latitude/longitude of the Denver Zoo, let me tag all 20 pictures in a gallery with that data all at once.  As it is, this process will take about 7 minutes to do 20 pics, and my mouse hand will be pretty sore by the end.

And a couple of things I haven’t experimented with too much yet.  With upgraded accounts you can completely customize the site’s headers, footers, and styles – nice.  You can also set your own pricing for people who order prints of your photos, and you keep most of the markup (not that I need that feature now, but I really like that it’s there).

All in all, I like Smugmug a lot, and I’ve decided to stay there for now.

[If you want to try it yourself, save yourself 20%, and save me 20% too :-), use this link.]

Review – Zoto

Up next in my short series is Zoto. I first heard of these folks at BlogOn 2005, when I met Kord (their CEO).  He gave me a quick demo of what they’re up to, and I got a coupon good for a free 5GB upgraded account.  Cool!

Here’s the now-dormant site I set up.

For those without a cool free-account coupon, here’s the deal.  Free accounts have 2GB of space, unlimited storage, and they don’t say there’s a limit on bandwidth.  Premium accounts ($44.95/yr) have 5GB of space, and special areas for private photos.  Seems a touch expensive, but hey – I wasn’t too worried about it, I had a free upgrade coupon. :-)

The site looks really nice when you first get in there, and there are some nice tools to help you.  I like the uploader application, which helps you batch-upload pics to the site.

So the first problem…the site seemed slooooooow.  Hopefully it’s growing pains – but I noticed over the span of a week that quite often I’d be looking at a page of photos, and a few of them wouldn’t load.  Or it would take a _really_ long time for some to load.  And it wasn’t just me – some friends who I sent my zoto URL to said the same thing.

Zoto has a cool gallery feature, where you can even choose the URL for your gallery.  You can add photos to it, and you can invite other folks to contribute to the gallery.  You can choose different templates for your gallery.  But there’s a problem.

The gallery templates all show thumbnails, which is good.  But the thumbnails are resized to 106 pixels on the SHORT side, and then cropped to 106×106.  Every thumbnail is square, and they are cropped.  I can’t live with that…I want uncropped thumbnails that retain the same aspect ratio as my originals.  I don’t care how small you have to make them – but don’t crop them.  And they’re showing the correctly-shaped thumbnails elsewhere – just not in the galleries.

But hey, I thought, this isn’t Flickr/Yahoo. ;-)  This is a small company, and I bet if I post on their forums, maybe someone would respond and there would be a magic fix loaded in a few days.  Or at least letting me know it was on the list.  Or telling me to go to hell.  Anything…but I was sure I’d get a response, so I posted on the forum, with some example thumbnails showing what I was talking about.  The example I posted was a picture of the Washington Monument – and the way it was cropped, you really couldn’t even tell what it was. 

So I waited.  Checked every hour or so for a while, nothing.  Ok, I’ll keep working with the site, and surely they’ll get back to me.  Waited a few days, nothing.  It’s now been 9 days since I posted that, and I’ve given up.  Hmm.

The private photos and galleries thing was, well, to be honest, I never figured it out.  Maybe my account wasn’t really an upgraded account (it kept telling me I had a 5GB account, but also asked me to upgrade now and then).  So I’ll refrain from commenting…other than to say it’s not a good thing that I wasn’t sure if I even had the account level that would let me protect photos and galleries from the public.  It could be I’m just a bonehead and didn’t find it.

I’m also a little worried about the main screen GUI that visitors see.  When I send a friend or family member here, and I say “check out my new animal pictures”, it’s unclear exactly where they should go.  You need to click on the “Galleries” link – but that’s not obvious, and I can imagine people might never notice that link.  Especially when it says “His Views” – not clear at all that’s somewhere I should go.  And I don’t really want other ads on my page (Google ads below the “His Views”) – if anyone’s going to have ads, it ought to be me.  Unless, of course, I really am on a free account, in which case zoto can have the ads…but I’d rather pay and get rid of them.

There were a lot of things I liked – in the photo view, you can download lots of different sizes of images (including user-specified sizes), and they surface the tags you’re using and a feature called “similar photos”.  They expose EXIF information in a nice way (although one example shutter speed was 3125/1000000 sec – couldn’t you maybe reduce that to 1/320 for me?).  And I liked that they linked to Slide – this is a pretty cool site I didn’t know about before playing with Zoto.

In summary, I really wanted this site to work for me.  But the combination of the generally slow performance, the critical (to me) thumbnail problem, the fact that no one seemed to care about my thumbnail problem, and the general GUI issues, led me to move on.