Answers.Body: <p>Somehow, the images were created thinking Imagick wasn't installed. Clearing the cache forced the images to be recreated and seems to have fixed it.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2015-08-31T15:13:07.130Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2015-08-31T15:13:07.130Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Tim Kelty
Body: <p>I have a client with <em>very</em> stringent concerns over acurate color in thier images.</p>
  
  <p>They have noticed that image resized from Craft have some dramatic color discrepancies, which I have verified. It's nothing you'd probably notice in a regular photo, but these are actual fabric swatch images, so the color is crucial.</p>
  
  <p>Anyway - first thing I verified was that Imagick was being used, which it is.</p>
  
  <p>However, when I look at the file info, it still says something about <code>gd-jpeg</code> which concerning...not sure if that is just a red herring though.</p>
  
  <pre><code>❯ file resized-720.jpeg
  resized-720.jpeg: JPEG image data, JFIF standard 1.01, comment: "CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJ"
  </code></pre>
  
  <p>Is this more appropriately posted as an issue for <a href="https://github.com/avalanche123/Imagine" rel="nofollow">https://github.com/avalanche123/Imagine</a>?</p>
  
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2015-08-31T14:38:21.313Z
Comments.Text: Do you get the same color discrepancy if you use Imagick from the command line?
Comments.UserDisplayName: Brad Bell
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2015-08-31T15:10:48.690Z
Comments.Text: I don't. So I manually set `'imageDriver' => 'imagick'`, cleared the cache, and then they looked good on the server (also no gd-jpeg) header.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Tim Kelty
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2015-08-31T15:12:09.167Z
Comments.Text: However, even if I take the imageDriver setting out now, it still works...so it seems at some point when the images were created Craft didn't think I had ImageMagick installed.
Comments.UserDisplayName: Tim Kelty
Comments.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Comments.CreationDate: 2015-08-31T17:21:04.980Z
Comments.Text: Huh... weird.   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Comments.UserDisplayName: Brad Bell
Tags: <image><image-transforms><imagick>
Title: Asset transform messing with color
ThreadText: # Asset transform messing with color
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2015-08-31)
  
  I have a client with *very* stringent concerns over acurate color in thier images.
  
  They have noticed that image resized from Craft have some dramatic color discrepancies, which I have verified. It's nothing you'd probably notice in a regular photo, but these are actual fabric swatch images, so the color is crucial.
  
  Anyway - first thing I verified was that Imagick was being used, which it is.
  
  However, when I look at the file info, it still says something about `gd-jpeg` which concerning...not sure if that is just a red herring though.
  
  ```
  ❯ file resized-720.jpeg
  resized-720.jpeg: JPEG image data, JFIF standard 1.01, comment: "CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJ"
  
  ```
  
  Is this more appropriately posted as an issue for <https://github.com/avalanche123/Imagine>?
  
  **Tags:** image, image-transforms, imagick
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_1**: Do you get the same color discrepancy if you use Imagick from the command line?  
  > **username_0**: I don't. So I manually set `'imageDriver' => 'imagick'`, cleared the cache, and then they looked good on the server (also no gd-jpeg) header.  
  > **username_0**: However, even if I take the imageDriver setting out now, it still works...so it seems at some point when the images were created Craft didn't think I had ImageMagick installed.  
  > **username_1**: Huh... weird.   ¯\_(ツ)_/¯  
  
  ---
  
  ## 1 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_0 on 2015-08-31. Score: 1
  
  Somehow, the images were created thinking Imagick wasn't installed. Clearing the cache forced the images to be recreated and seems to have fixed it.
  
  
  ---
  
  