Dark Photoshop 32-bit images when "Use graphics processor" enabled

[dlparisi]

I was trying to do some quick 32-bit compositing in photoshop (I usually work in 16 bit) and was noticing that any image, either opening an exr, starting a new 32bit image, or converting to 32bit resulted in the darker image. Only photoshop seemed to exhibit any problem since if I opened the exr in the VFB or other programs it looked fine and also match the rendered VFB. I updated the GPU driver (clean install of 551.23) on the 3070 and restarted the machine, all with no change. I was eventually able to narrow it down to the "Use graphics processor" setting in the Photoshop-->Performance setting (the "advanced Settings" options don't seem make a difference). Turning this off let's opened and new 32bit files behave properly. Weirdly it's effect is only seen when the file is opened or created. If I turn the setting off and open the exr the file is fine and I can continue working with it but if I then reopen that file or create a new one the it's messed up. Below is an example. I turned off the setting, opened the exr and duplicated it on the right (the 'copy' one). I then closed the original exr, turned "on" the setting and reopened the exr which resulted in the darker image on the left (mainly some crushed shadows). I then added a gradient ramp at the top just to see what's happening and you can see how the gradient is no longer smooth, especially at the darker end where there is a noticeable 'hump' as it turns to black.



Even without restarting photoshop it's obvious that the "use graphics processor" is a enabled on the left image as guides, paths, and eyedropper targets are all nicely smoothed, and simultaneously it's disabled on the right since all of these are jagged. I'm sure this accounts for why the right image is still displays correctly. Even pasting the entire left image into the right one let's the image correct itself and they match perfectly (the pixel values are all the same).

So.... does this happen to anyone else? I don't recall this behavior before but I can't seem to find out if anyone is having a similar experience via a google search. I can post to the adobe forums but I was hoping someone could see if they have a similar experience before doing so. I can't figure out if it's something with my machine, the gpu, the driver or photoshop. Is there some setting somewhere that I'm missing or accidentally ticked?

[dlparisi]

Just in case it's something with my exr (I don't think it is as I've tried it with a few) here is the one I used in the image above: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1OuI...usp=drive_link

[rusteberg]

What's your working color space set to in photoshop? And are you being prompted each time you open the file in photoshop of a mismatched profile? Edit > Color Settings (Shift Ctrl K)

[dlparisi]

What's your working color space set to in photoshop? And are you being prompted each time you open the file in photoshop of a mismatched profile?

Sorry, I should have mentioned this in my first post. It's set up exactly like yours, see below (I've tried it several ways as well). When I open the exr it prompts me about the alpha (see my question a bit further down) and then about the missing profile at which I apply the srgb default. If I open it with the graphics processor 'enabled' it's dark, if I open it with it 'off' it comes out as expected.



Another question for everyone...on the newer versions of photoshop when you open an EXR, does it prompt you for what to do with the alpha with a dialog like this:

I remember years ago installing a plugin or two to handle exr's so I'm just double checking that this is the default behavior and not a plugin that's hanging around. I've checked the usual plugin folder and don't see anything but I want to be sure.

[rusteberg]

Instead of applying the profile when you open it, try assigning the working RGB profile instead.

For the transparency, it's simply asking how you want to work with the alpha channel. As alpha channel will give you an alpha channel to work with. Transparency will flatten the data into the image so you'd see the checkerboard behind the teapot with the option to mask the layer (essentially creating the alpha a different way)

[dlparisi]

Instead of applying the profile when you open it, try assigning the working RGB profile instead.

Thanks but that's what I usually do (sRGB is the working profile). I've tried nearly every option there as well with no usable changes (obviously some of the options lead to some crazy colors for incorrect profiles). I don't think it's directly related to the profiles though. For example, if I open any 8 bit image (preferably something with some shadow/darker areas since it's easier to see) and then convert it to 32bit via Image-->Mode-->32 bits/channel, the image gets darker. If I then do the same but select 8 bits/channel and down-convert using Exposure and Gamma (0.0/1.0) the image goes back to looking correct. I think this is only a display problem, not a color conversion problem, since I think the pixel values aren't being changed. And just to be clear, this behavior ONLY happens when "Use graphics processor" is checked in the Performance setting.

As to the alpha, I know what it does and the different options, I just wanted to makes sure I was just using the stock OpenEXR file reader and not some random plugin.

Thanks for the help though. Much appreciated.

[rusteberg]

You bet. Didn't experience any of that with the exr you provided with it on over here. Hope you figure it out!

[dlparisi]

So I was finally able to figure out what the problem was (sort of). It's a result of my color management/calibration through DisplayCal/ArgyllCMS. The problem seems to stem from the profile it creates but I'm not clear why it only affects images when viewed as 32 bit and "use graphics processor" enabled. Other than this issue I've been really happy with the calibration profiles it creates on my Dell monitors using the Spyder 5 express. For the time being I've gone back to calibration using the regular Spyder5 software which doesn't exhibit any of the problems. Sorry for the fire drill.

[dlparisi]

Just an fyi... The problem seems to be rectified by using the "curves+matrix" profile type in DisplayCAL instead of the default "XYZ LUT+matrix" as described in the DisplayCAL forum here: https://hub.displaycal.net/forums/to...2/#post-140591. I'm still not sure if it's a problem with PS or DisplayCAL or Argyll but everything is working fine with a decent enough calibration.