if i convert a fine jpeg to tiff

Simple answer - no
 
does it have any significant benifit at all? you see i have only just found the wonders of raw shooting and previously shot my mothers wedding (not the official tog) but shot in fine jpeg the best quality before raw that my camera offers and now need to edit them all to put into a photo book. ad obviously i want her to show people that im not rubish lol so that maybe i can get some future work as i am a student and all expeirience and cash i can get is usefull lol so i need the pictures to be the best they can possibly be! lol
 
JPEG is a lossy compression method. Parts of the data are discarded and then interpolated when the files is decompressed. However low you have the compression set there always is some data loss. Converting to a TIFF after compressing will not reconstruct that lost data. So all you have at the end is a TIFF file with all the lost elements from the JPEG . You might as well keep the JPEG.

IF you want to have high quality files, but don't want the size overhead of a TIFF look at saving in RAW. This will be larger than a JPEG file but not as large as a TIFF. Plus there are other advantages as well. You will need special software to handle the RAW file but there is a lot of versions around, and if you have a Canon camera it comes with DPP which can handle Canon RAW files. Photoshop will also handle RAW files from most cameras, dependent on what version you have.
 
Chappers said:
JPEG is a lossy compression method. Parts of the data are discarded and then interpolated when the files is decompressed. However low you have the compression set there always is some data loss. Converting to a TIFF after compressing will not reconstruct that lost data. So all you have at the end is a TIFF file with all the lost elements from the JPEG . You might as well keep the JPEG.

IF you want to have high quality files, but don't want the size overhead of a TIFF look at saving in RAW. This will be larger than a JPEG file but not as large as a TIFF. Plus there are other advantages as well. You will need special software to handle the RAW file but there is a lot of versions around, and if you have a Canon camera it comes with DPP which can handle Canon RAW files. Photoshop will also handle RAW files from most cameras, dependent on what version you have.
Click to expand...

That's not entirely true. If the pics were shot in jpeg and you still have the originals - ie the memory card (or they have only been saved once) it would be worth converting to tiff now to prevent any more loss. Im assuming you want to keep the photos forever and with jpeg every time you save them you will lose data and they will degrade. You will never get any data back or improve the quality but you wont lose any more and if there converted from the memory card then it probably wont be noticeable. HTH
 
Tiffs don't necessarily have to be bigger than raw files if you use e.g. LZW compression (lossless).
Converting to tiff won't improve the image quality, but saving into jpeg again can reduce the image quality quite a bit.
In short, if you've shot in jpeg, converting your shots to tiff is pointless.
However, I recommend saving your edits in LZW compressed tiffs or in pngs (not indexed).
 
Does it not really depend on the end use ?

A colleague of mine went on his hols and shot in the lowest jpeg the D2X does. His first shoot back he (stupidly he admits) forgot to change that setting and the client wanted 20x16 prints from a 1mb jpeg - and they looked fine

The point being, the originator is preparing a photo-book rather than selling huge images for mag use and larger. jpegs are fine for this, period. Their only downside is with repeated PP and saving, so a once change or three times even - he'll never notice the difference

DD
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top