I export RAW files (in adobe colorspace) and then convert to sRGB.[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=189501\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
RAW files don't have a colourspace (well no profile, at least!) so it's not clear what you're doing. Are you exporting AdobeRGB files and converting to sRGB in some external application (e.g. Photoshop)? Or are you simply exporting sRGB files from Lightroom?
When I prepare files using Photoshop, I'm used to the option 'don't color manage' which gives me the best results. But this option is not present in Lightroom...
If you get "best results" by turning off colour management then there's something weird going on! BTW, in that case Photoshop will display the images as though they were in your default RGB colourspace (see the Color Settings) even though it treats them as having no profile.
Is there a correct way of handling this?
When you put images up on the web there are no guarantees as to how the colours will be seen at "the other end". If the images have a profile embedded in them, some browsers (e.g. Safari, Firefox 3) will use the appropriate display profile to show the correct colours (if the user has actually profiled their display of course!). If the images are untagged, some browsers (e.g. Firefox 3) will assume they're meant to be sRGB and attempt to show the correct colours (I think this was the intent behind the W3c web standard). Most other browsers will just send the pixel values to the display unmodified (effectively assuming the images are in the display's colourspace/profile).
I work with an imac 24" and a Macbook. Both profiled with a spider.
What type of Spyder (e.g. Express)? What colour temperature/gamma did you calibrate them to during the profiling?
We expect that all displays (even those on Macs) are calibrated to a gamma of 2.2 (ok, so this is a generalisation) and most displays will be calibrated to 6500K. These are characteristics of the sRGB space, and one of the effects of calibrating your display to these values is that if software doesn't use profiles and just sends data to the display (e.g. Internet Explorer, Firefox 2) then the display's colour space should be roughly similar to sRGB, and thus if the image was supposed to be in sRGB then the colours should be vaguely correct.
Given all the variables involved, if colour management is not used then it should be obvious that different users will see different colour shifts. User A's display is probably calibrated slightly differently to user B's. If each user has a profiled display then Photoshop/Lightroom/Safari/etc will know how to compensate and can draw correct colours on each display, but only by using the appropriate display profile at each end.
Note that different calibration/profiling software will do calibration differently. Software like Eye-One Match, ColorEyes Display, and the advanced Spyder software will guide you through adjusting R/G/B controls, brightness, contrast, etc. On top of that they will do some of the calibration by manipulating the video card lookup tables (LUTs). Of course, with the screens on a MacBook and an iMac the only hardware controls available are for brightness, and the LUTs have to do all the work.
Software like the Spyder2express and the huey software will only do calibration by manipulating the LUTs. With those when using external displays you will usually get a better calibration by at least adjusting the monitor controls manually before generating a profile.
I received some helpful replies which explain the problem but do not necessarily solve the problem of being certain that other people will see the photos as intended.
The bottom line remains: each monitor out there will probably be calibrated differently (some dramatically differently) and there is no way of "being certain that other people will see the photos as intended"!