Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Canon EOS dSLR

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jul 3, 2005, 1:33 PM   #11
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 21
Default

Thanks guys.

Looks like I'll be leaning towards RAW+JPG from here on. And here I was thinking 1 GB CF card was more than plenty! I'm starting to believe this is going to be a very expensive hobby. -- considering the equipment, software and printing. (and I thought golf was expensive).

But at least with photography if I don't like a shot, I can redo without penalty.



Ronnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 3, 2005, 1:47 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 21
Default

I just realized I started this topic in the wrong category. Oops!
Ronnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 4, 2005, 3:26 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
polarwasp's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 167
Default

Could be the wrong area, but it's much learning. I never realised JPEG's were compressed each time I saved them... gonna try now!!

First file was 144835 bytes ... after 10 saves 144095 bytes. 0.5% of the info lost. Honest, I can't see the difference, but it's there :roll:!
polarwasp is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 5, 2005, 6:06 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

For getting prints, jpeg files saved as level 10 in PS are more than enough. No need to send bigger jpeg files. Level 10 files are 3 times smaller than level 12. And you can't tell the different in print.

Here is some info from www.whcc.com

"JPEG compression is a very efficient, lossy image compression algorithm designed specifically for saving photographic images. It takes advantage of how we see color versus brightness to only save information needed to reproduce the image for people to view. Image data is lost during compression, but at high levels of quality you will not see a difference between a Level 10 JPEG and a TIFF printed to photographic paper. JPEG compression is perfect for transient files for sending to the lab for printing, but avoid using the compression as a working file type. Also avoid opening a JPEG, making changes, and resaving it again as a JPEG repeatedly. If your workflow calls for this to happen, save your files as TIFF or PSD files until they are complete and ready for output, at which time you should save them as a level 10 JPEG. Any JPEG artifacts you see in your prints come from the JPEG file coming out of your camera, not from saving them as a level 10 for output purposes."

Forget about sending tiff and PSD.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2005, 12:19 AM   #15
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 21
Default

Now I'm getting confused.
Ronnell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2005, 11:03 AM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 155
Default

polarwasp wrote:
Quote:
Could be the wrong area, but it's much learning. I never realised JPEG's were compressed each time I saved them... gonna try now!!

First file was 144835 bytes ... after 10 saves 144095 bytes. 0.5% of the info lost. Honest, I can't see the difference, but it's there :roll:!
My point was not that the file would get smaller each time. Indeed, it could even grow in sizeslightly after the initial compression. The point is that the quality will degrade with each new open-save cycle due to JPEG's lossy compression algorithm.

I have no axe to grind here and no contest to win. If you are happy with jpegs and cannot see the difference, then by all means, stick with the jpeg format. Just look at the space you are saving!
wburychka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2005, 5:07 PM   #17
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

Ronnell wrote:
Quote:
Now I'm getting confused.
Ronnell, I am not advocating editing jpeg files aand saving on themselves. I shoot in RAW, covert to 8-bit jpeg as I have older version of PS so can't work on 16-bit files. Do all editing in PS, save in PSD format and convert back to 8-bit RGB jpeg for web or printing. Most printing services need 8-bit jpeg for printing and it is at final printing where whether you use jpeg or bigger TIFF file, it doesn't matter.

If you have latest versions of PS or equivalent tool which support 16-bit files, I would recommend using them.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2005, 5:15 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
bobbyz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1,423
Default

Ronnel, your camera puts out 3456x2304 so if printing at 300dpi, you can get 11.52x7.68 inch.

You can always upsize to bigger size if you want (or use lower dpi). Just use Bicubic Smoother in PS or other applications like Genuine Fractals. Most online printing services will do the upsizsing for you. Doing it yourself you can control the cropping and do sharpening after resizing.

BTW - I just got some 11x14 prints from mpix.com. They are from my 10D which is 6MP. I am really impressed. A student in one of photograpgy class had her 4MP p&simage blown up to something like 17x20 or bigger and it still looked darn good on print.
bobbyz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Jul 6, 2005, 7:31 PM   #19
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 577
Default

Shooting RAW and processing afterwards does give you more control and can give y you better quality over JPEG. However, it also adds time to your workflow and RAW uses a lot of space on your CF card and harddisk. Its a trade-off.

Barthold
barthold is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:40 AM.