And why am I posting this in the Photogprahy thread? Because previously I used Safari to view photos and photoblogs online because it was the only browser that supported ICC colour profiles embedded into photos. The current generation of IE and FF did not and colours are not as originally intended. Now, however, FF RC2 does also adhere to ICC colour matching profiles and now all photos displayed online will be displayed as intended irrespective of whether the poster knew how to convert the photo for internet usage or not. That and FF uses less memory, has less memory leaks and can display more web pages correctly than Safari. (Although i'll miss Safari's built in RSS reader).
Didn't read it, I was testing RC2 and just noticed that all my photos looked more vibrant than before, so just did some subjective testing as well as checking with this site: http://www.gballard.net/psd/srgbforwww.html Subjectively (probably even objectively too) it seems as if RC2 is ICC compliant.
You could be right. In 1.5 the're a vast difference. I may download 2 later myself then [edit] Installed it, and there's no difference between 1.5 and 2 with regards to tagged images. [edit again] I was wrong... images 2 and 3 are different in Firefox 2.. so it's reading the embedded profile.