Re: JPEG compression in a TIFF file, pointless?

cypherswipe wrote:

Is there any point in using a TIFF with JPEG compression as opposed to
just using a JPEG? Even with the lossy compression, TIFF files are
still massive, plus using lossy compression defeats the whole comcept
of using TIFFs to preserve your images. If you're going to use TIFF,
use lossless compression. If you're going to use lossy compression, use
JPEG. Is there any purpose for which a JPEG compressed TIFF is actually
useful?

You're comparing apples to oranges. JPEG is not a file format, it is a codestream format. One popular file format for JPEG is JFIF, the one
you typically use (and misname as "JPEG"). A file format defines room for additional meta information. For the same classification, TIFF is *not* an image compression standard. It is a container format that is able to carry several codestream formats. It starts from "raw" uncompressed image data (which is often identified with TIFF, though this is really a misconception) and included JPEG codestreams as just another alternative.

Thus, you can either ask: Does it make sense to use TIFF as JPEG container format instead of JFIF? Actually, for typical applications, the difference isn't high. TIFF might be more flexible, but it isn't "huge" (this is because you compare TIFF carrying raw image data with JFIF carrying a JPEG codestream) by itself. JFIF as container for JPEG is clearly more popular.

And you may ask, does "raw image data" make more sense than JPEG compressed data? (Which is the matter of the codestream). And the answer is again, "depends on what you want to do".

So long,
	Thomas

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Fuji A340 resolution question
    ... Compression is the difference between Normal and Fine - Fine has less compression and hence bigger files. ... On my 6MP DSLR I have a choice of Basic, Normal or Fine, and for me the 1.5MB sized files from the Normal setting are adequate - I can see very little gain with the 2.8MB Fine setting. ... It only produces jpeg images, and, while they are OK for general use, I am aware of the potential quality loss when working with them. ... I have even wondered if I should convert them to something like tiff format immediately after importing them onto the computer, as I have plenty of drive space available. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: OT: Early Fall
    ... Since you are not processing the jpg and then saving the file, the compression and decompression will not introduce noise into the photo. ... TIFF pictures store a single raster image at any color depth. ... Not all TIFF files are compatible with all programs that support the baseline TIFF standard. ... JPEG pictures store a single raster image in 24-bit color. ...
    (rec.boats)
  • Re: JPG or TIFF
    ... At true minimal compression a JPEG image has almost all of the original ... construction cunningly manages to discard high frequency noise ... or extreme dynamic range images where 12bit TIFF comes into its own. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Best format question
    ... I discovered that this format is prone to progressive quality loss over ... my camera only produces JPGs. ... tool and then once you make any changes saving as tiff would be fine, ... open them make a global change and resave as JPEG. ...
    (rec.photo.digital)
  • Re: Digital storage
    ... Tiff will be around a long time, ... I basically agree in regards to JPEG, ... decide which new format will be around the longest. ... stored in nearly as many places as the JPEG standards, ...
    (alt.photography)