Quick Question about Color Profiles

Since it's about my ThinkPad I'll just post it here:

Some time ago I installed a color profile for my X220 with IPS screen. It was from notebookcheck. They used Spyder3 so it should be accurate.

However, I only really see a difference when I open a Picture in Windows Photo Viewer. For example, if I open my Wallpaper in WPV and compare the two, certain colors, especially purple are much stronger.

If I set WPV to full screen the colors are weak again, just like my wallpaper.

This raises a question: Do color profiles also affect how colors are displayed on the desktop, or only how they are displayed in programs?

 

A color profile adjusts the mappings from digital values to the display characteristics of a particular screen. (Every screen, although from the same model by the same manufacturer, is unique.) A color profile is considered accurate when it adapts well to such characteristics.

Windows Photo Viewer is a handy program, but not a very good one. It resamples to fit an image in a certain rectangular area, and in doing so, it causes color shifts (and other artifacts). A more professional program, like Photoshop, does a much better job at resampling and preserving color fidelity.

To answer your question briefly: yes.

 

Thanks for the clarification, but does "yes" mean yes as in color profiles only affect certain programs?

Also, WPV does not "color shift" because compared to how the image is displayed on a better monitor (sRGB) the typicial lack of purple is gone. (missing purple is a problem across ALL screens with less than sRGB)

This basically means it shows the picture just the it's supposed to. Is the color profile showing its effect here?

I'm kind of confused about this whole thing at the moment.

EDIT: Colors are shown as "stock" in GIMP too. Only WPV seems to show "enhanced" colors.

This really bugs me because in WPV colors are more vivid, white is white and not yellow and some missing or weak colors are displayed much stronger.