What format to save in after RAW

I

icp2911

Suspended / Banned
Messages
2
Name
Ian
Edit My Images
Yes
I have just switched from shooting in jpg to shooting in RAW.

After I have processed the image in Corel Paintshop pro photo / photoshop what is the best format to save in so I can make photobooks, photoslide shows etc. jpg, TIFF What do you think?
 
Well you can save as TIFFs which are non lossy but they're very large files and can soon fill up your hard drive..

Saving as jpegs is fine as long as you don't do further work on them as jpeg compression and quality loss increases each time you save the image.

The important thing really is to make sure that you save your original raw file as it's the equivalent of a digital negative and you can alway go back and process it how you like.
 
Personally I would save in the format that meets the requirements of the end use. In most cases this will be jpg, but on rare occasions I will save as Tiff.
 
I think you've got all the answers above. However, as long as you keep the original RAW file you can reproduce the most relevant output file as required.
 
I started saving in TIF, mainly for printing purposes (Photobox), but they and some other printers will only upload jpg- so I used jpg instead.
 
After your finished editing, save in JPEG.

JPEG is a much smaller file size and can be opened/used everywhere.

No need to waste hard-drive space with large TIFF files etc if you've finished editing them.
 
Usually jpeg, but if I need as little loss as possible but with out the massive file size of TIFF, i'll save as PNG.

Only because most of my images end up going online rather than being printed.
 
slinky1989 said:
Usually jpeg, but if I need as little loss as possible but with out the massive file size of TIFF, i'll save as PNG.
Click to expand...

How do you find PNG's compare to jpg? I always understood PNG to be optimised for graphics, ie hard lines, solid areas of colour, while jpg was supposed to be better at textures, graduated colour, etc. I've never really tried photos in PNG format because of that - presumably you find it better, so may be worth me trying?

David
 
You can see a description of all the common image formats here.

PNG is good for photos, it says.
 
I always save my 'working' file as a .psd and my 'finished' edit as a .jpg whether its for print or web. .png is not quite as good: it supports transparency which makes it good for graphics, but it is not universally supported by all browsers (yet) so not an ideal choice for photos or web.
 
scuby said:
How do you find PNG's compare to jpg? I always understood PNG to be optimised for graphics, ie hard lines, solid areas of colour, while jpg was supposed to be better at textures, graduated colour, etc. I've never really tried photos in PNG format because of that - presumably you find it better, so may be worth me trying?

David
Click to expand...

I don't find image quality to suffer at all, but then I'm no pro so I may be missing any issues it creates. But for the file size, you end up with way less compression artifacts than you do with jpeg.

All the latest browsers I've used (chrome, firefox 3, 4 and 5, IE 7, 8, 9 and safari) all support it with no issues aswell.
 
Photodiva said:
I always save my 'working' file as a .psd and my 'finished' edit as a .jpg whether its for print or web. .png is not quite as good: it supports transparency which makes it good for graphics, but it is not universally supported by all browsers (yet) so not an ideal choice for photos or web.
Click to expand...

Yip me to I also save a layered .psd as I can then go back and rework somthing if I want to. a big file though.
:eek:
All the best
 
roseway said:
You can see a description of all the common image formats here.

PNG is good for photos, it says.
Click to expand...

Ah, so I was right in the sense that it's optimised for flat areas of colour and inefficient for photos, but didn't realise it was lossless so will always give better image quality than a jpg, just a bigger filesize.

I've been educated - excellent!

Cheers,

David
 
Word I had from the printers, most mainstream work is JPG anyway,, I was told I could send TIFF's if I wanted but it would still be converted to a JPG before printing so might as well save the transfer time.

That and I'm chewing up HDD's as it is without filling them super quick with TIFF files.

And if I have to do any major rework on files (heaven forbid, its time I never get back), I just save the PSD and export as appropriate.
 
Photodiva said:
I always save my 'working' file as a .psd and my 'finished' edit as a .jpg whether its for print or web. .png is not quite as good: it supports transparency which makes it good for graphics, but it is not universally supported by all browsers (yet) so not an ideal choice for photos or web.
Click to expand...

Same here, keep all raw, keep all working psd files then final image save as jpg.
 
You can completely bypass this whole issue, and save a lot of disc space too, by using a non desructive editing program like Lightroom or Aperture (I use the former). Import your photos into the prog., manipulate to your hearts content, then if you need to send the files somewhere (ie a print shop) simply export them in whatever desired format, send them and delete (the exported file) from your hard drive. Your work is still saved by the program yet your raw file is untouched, the changes you made to your pic are saved as a tiny data file which the program accesses and applies whenever you open the photo. Additional photoshop manipulation is available at a 'right click' (pc) although Lightroom is so powerful I only go to PS rarely.
 
peterforum said:
You can completely bypass this whole issue, and save a lot of disc space too, by using a non desructive editing program like Lightroom or Aperture (I use the former). Import your photos into the prog., manipulate to your hearts content, then if you need to send the files somewhere (ie a print shop) simply export them in whatever desired format, send them and delete (the exported file) from your hard drive. Your work is still saved by the program yet your raw file is untouched, the changes you made to your pic are saved as a tiny data file which the program accesses and applies whenever you open the photo. Additional photoshop manipulation is available at a 'right click' (pc) although Lightroom is so powerful I only go to PS rarely.
Click to expand...

Exactly what I do. When I need an outputted version for printing or upload I knock one out to suit, then its binned once its been used. The raw stays on a hd linked to LR3 and space is kept to a minimum
 
Echoing the above, I do exactly that - keep as RAW in lightroom, export as needed and delete jpgs once not needed.
 
I convert l my RAW to .dng and keep those, and export to whatever format I need at the time
 
Will copy. Keep RAW, so you can reprocess. Keep settings of your favorite raw converter as well in same folder. Even if you convert 20M RAW to 16bit TIF that is about 120M you still loose original information. Well, ususally 21Mpx maximum quality jpeg is maybe 12M. But you loose 12bit colors in this case etc. Shoot better, shoot less, store all your masterpeaces for children :)
 
The only other question to answer is how long will the format be current and how long you wish to preserve the pictures.

If you find a pile of old 100 year old photos, you can look through them and decide what to do with them.

In a 100 years time if someone discovers a photo file (assuming they can read from the media its stored on) what will they open it with ?

Judging by the number of posts regarding "how do I open my RAW files ?" it bodes ill for the future (long term).

Just depends how far forward you are hoping to preserve your pictures.:shrug:
 
Interesting though, because it opens up the whole issue of personal photo archiving and how we will randomly access history in the future. Some years ago is was so easy to view very personal and individual local history in any car boot sale or market by browsing through the hundreds of old paper prints that were being sold. It was a form of access to social history which digital is likely to completely bypass. Will we be buying old hard drives and browsing those? unlikely (unless of course they contain lost government secrets!). Yet these changes and developments usually introduce something new where something has been lost. Not sure what that is in this case, facebook? personal websites? Hmmm.....
Peter
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top