Photoshop - Corrupts JPEG on load!


#1

The following image looks correct in browsers (FF or IE) and in viewers (e.g.Irfanview) but not in Photoshop! Save the JPEG and open it in Photoshop, see it yourself…Pay attention to the pink aliasing on the top-right.


#2

It looks fine to me, although it’s hard to tell on such a small image.


#3

sRGB image without a profile?

Looks fine (same as in browsers) after assigning sRGB profile, defaulting to working adobe RGB results a bit too saturated colors.

Could you tell what color settings do you have and with wich option you open the image (leave, assing working (what do you have here) or assing adobeRGB?)

edit: what ever I do, can’t see the pink aliasing.


#4

Subtle but horrible…


#5

ok. That one.

Colors seem brighter too on that right one and that I noticed at the first place. Opening with sRGB assigned fixes it here. To what profile you open the file in photoshop? And where does it come from (so what profile it should use?).


#6

How do you do that? The following steps are now working as you said:

  1. Open image
  2. Edit / Assign Profile / sRGB
    Still corrupt…

Actually, it doesn’t have to be color managed. See, any other application displays this file correctly.


#7

Actually, it doesn’t have to be color managed. See, any other application displays this file correctly.

…and most of other applications just silently show untagged image as sRGB, photoshop uses working profile (usually Adobe RGB).

But if sRGB doesn’t fix it for you, I’m kind of running out of ideas, since it does here.:shrug:


#8

Hey Tom (Maxwell customer here). Weird problem and assigning sRGB to the texture doesn’t fix it for me in Photoshop CS5. Definitely shows up differently in Preview.app in OS X

I’ll contact someone from Adobe about this. PM me your email.


#9

Weird, I tried to open the image in PaintTool SAI (no color management) and the result is just like in Photoshop. In painter 11 or GIMP, the image is displayed correctly.
It has probably to do with your jpeg compression that the two programs are unable to read correctly.
If I convert the image to bmp and compress again in jpeg, they are able to display them correctly.
That’s weird they are sharing the same bug.


#10

Please, tell me the exact steps you’re following. Otherwise, I have to think you cannot see the difference. :shrug:


#11

^my apologies - I was a bit hasty then (life happens also here). My steps were quite similar to yours when opening with sRGB -profile. And you are right - sRGB seems to correct some part of the problem, but not all of it. Strange. Below image some different tries:

up-left: photoshop, adobe rgb
up-right: photoshop, sRGB assigned
down-right: photoshop, some DHTV profile assigned
down-left: windows default viewer

Now with bit more time (and zoom) to look at it - it really seems that photoshop makes some larger junks there. :sad: Unfortunate. Hope this gets fixed.


#12

Thanks for confirming halen. As you see it’s quite subtle and destructive.:wink:


#13

Interpolation setting possibly? this issue seems to corrolate towards your previous issue with rotation. I did actually upsacle that image by 500% then reduce by the same amount so it would resample. Admitedly it was more blured but the artifact was gone


#14

No, it has nothing to do with the other post. :slight_smile:
As you see, here I only do “OPEN” in several applications and compare.

Let’s see:


#15

Adobe developer Chrix Cox made a comment here:
http://forums.adobe.com/message/2783831#2783831

…and locked both reports due to sockpuppetry (in his words).
Fan-tas-tic! :slight_smile:


#16

Hi Tom -

I was glad to see you post your findings to Adobe, and happy to participate in your threads.

Admittedly, I did not expect to be accused of being a sockpuppet, see both threads locked, and receive a ban warning via email within 1 hour of posting. Considering I am a loyal Photoshop user since version 1.0, for me to see posts demonstrating legitimately poor performance, which were polite, respectful and free of offensive content in any way closed, and defamatory remarks made about me by Adobe employees was disappointing and beyond unprofessional. Maybe more to the point, I’d say you hit them pretty close to the mark to get them all riled up like that. The extremely disrespectful treatment of customers is a separate issue, albeit perhaps more damaging, ultimately.

_Mike


#17

Tom,

You are absolutely correct - Photoshop’s jpeg algorithm seems to choke on this part of the image.

I converted the image to a png24bit version in Irfanview, and opened it in both Fireworks and Photoshop CS4, then saved both as a 99 quality jpg, and low and behold: though Photoshop did a somewhat better job at compressing that region, it still could not match the quality of the version in Fireworks. Interestingly enough the version in Fireworks (same quality setting: 99) not only looked slightly crispier and less noisy, but also kicked Photoshop’s butt regarding file size: 43.25kb PS - 38.75 FW.
Which once more proves Fireworks superiority as far as web graphics compression goes, in my opinion.

As for your experience on the Adobe forum: I read your courteous posts, and was honestly amazed at the disrespectful way the Adobe people returned ‘the favour’. Reminds me of the ol’ Quark support :wink: I second mverta’s statement: you must’ve hit a bit of a sore spot there.

The industry needs a new kid on the block to knock some sense in old men Photoshop’s head. They’ve grown too complacent.


#18

A bit surpriced about that Adobe forum responce, since I’ve always got very good customer service from there, but some of those responces and closing the thread didn’t look very professional. There was something usefull information als, but.ten years in the software industy has tought me a killer anwer to every bug report: “Thank you, we’ll investigate”. :smiley:

Process of actually doing something may take long time depending on the importance of the issue related to other issues or if it turns out that bug was not relevant at all and there might be some explanation, but client stays happy.

But this is quite off -topic. So did I understand it right that jpg is not corrupted on open, but same data is read differently and threated with less smoothing? Anyone tried to smooth chroma channels (as mentioned at adobe forum) to get the results closert to other applications?


#19

@Mike: It must be CS5’s new Content-Aware Accusation feature. :applause:

@hvanderwegen: I think, a software can only be as good as its developers and no more. :lightbulb If I were them realizing the industry standard PS cannot properly rotate an image for years I’d go nuts, too. :arteest:

@halen: Chris is simply advocating the issue with full awareness. I here open the same image on many other applications and they all perfectly show the same thing without me knowing what chroma sampling they use. You can also try it yourself. Besides, I guess he didn’t realize he shoot one of their fanboys having more than 4000 posts by admitting the rotation thing is something must be improved. How do they say at Adobe? --> Sigh! :thumbsup:


#20

Hehe,
after that thread, where half of the internet including ILM and Pixar employers were fighting against Chris Cox: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/369637?start=0&tstart=0
…I just wondering what were you expecting for :slight_smile:

If you can - I suggest to write directly to PS support or administration, because it’s a shame that such ppl are in charge on Adobe’s forums.