Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- From: "KatWoman" <JolieXPrincessXKatanaXXX@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2005 14:42:39 -0400
"J. A. Mc." <jaSPAMc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:hldse157i4sr2j9k6u0asc9odkkt49fjul@xxxxxxxxxx
> On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 15:10:42 +0200, Waldo <nobody@xxxxxxxxx> found these
> unused words floating about:
>
>>DBLEXPOSURE wrote:
>>> "tacit" <tacitr@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:tacitr-0F0312.12212925072005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>>>In article <sRTEe.5467$dM3.2949@trnddc04>,
>>>>"Aloha" <bigislandhilo@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I've had no problem with the results I get, but I have heard that it is
>>>>>better to save images in a TIFF format.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, that is correct.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Originally, I do a lot of editing
>>>>>of the first image applying filters, layers, actions, etc. Will I
>>>>>maintain
>>>>>better detail if I work in TIFF format?
>>>>
>>>>Yes.
>>>>
>>>>JPEG is a "lossy" format. In English that means that every time you save
>>>>a JPEG, the quality of the image is degraded in order to make the file
>>>>size smaller on your disk. This degradation is cumulative--if you save a
>>>>file, then open it and save it again, the quality is degraded again.
>>>>Open it and save it again, the quality is degraded again.
>>>>
>>>>Do not use JPEG unless you have a clear, specific reason you have to use
>>>>JPEG and no other format will work. The JPEG standard was invented for
>>>>situations where the size of the file on disk is critical, and image
>>>>quality is not important.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Since most of the original images
>>>>>are JPEG should I convert them to TIFF before I start editing?
>>>>
>>>>Yes. You can not make up the quality that was lost when it was first
>>>>saved as JPEG, but you can prevent further degredation by working in
>>>>TIFF from that point on.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I do notice that if I re-open a closed JPEG image that has a lot of
>>>>>white
>>>>>background that I often get lots of "ghost like colored pixels" in the
>>>>>white
>>>>>area.
>>>>
>>>>Correct. You are seeing the image degradation I'm talking about.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Also would there be any value in converting all the images I currently
>>>>>have
>>>>>into a TIFF format?
>>>>
>>>>If you want to edit them in the future, yes. If they are finished and
>>>>oyu'll never edit them again, no--the damage is already done.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>Art, photography, shareware, polyamory, literature, kink:
>>>>all at http://www.xeromag.com/franklin.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Use .jpg to save for web publishing or archiving. Use .Tif as your
>>> working
>>> file. I belive it is better to print from a .tif as well
>>
>>Why use TIFF? I always use PSD so I have all layer, masks, type etcetera
>>stored as well. The final output MAY be JPG depending on the purpose,
>>but I keep the original as PSD. I hardly ever use TIFF.
>>
> TIFF is mor of an internationally recognized format, however, .psd is also
> my choice for saving/storing INTERNALLY. No loss, so you can export
> (save-as) to any other format.
>
> No need to convert before editing, either! Just "SAVE-AS" and PS will do
> it
> when saving!
>
> Always better to print from a LOSSLESS file, than a lossy <G>!
I save 3 versions of my PS'ed work:
the original file in PSD, uncropped showing all layers, for my self as
refence and if changes are needed.
one (or several) TIFF's: Flattened so Windows and Mac users can see them
wiothout owning PS, with correct res and cropping for prints, I often save
several versions this way (different layers turned on and off, B&W and
color, etc)
then I take my TIFF's and make web sized jpgs for interenet and emailing
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- From: Hunt
- Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- References:
- Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- From: DBLEXPOSURE
- Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- From: Waldo
- Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- Prev by Date: Re: OT-ish Best Graphics Card For Photoshop?
- Next by Date: Re: Extended Options Problem
- Previous by thread: Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- Next by thread: Re: JPEG versus TIFF
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|