Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digicam Help > General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Feb 5, 2003, 10:01 AM   #1
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24
Default TIFF versus JPG

Hi,

I got my camera a few week ago and now I'm trying to understand all the fonction. It is an olympus c3000

My setting could be TIFF, HQ, SHQ1 or SHQ2

I will like to know what is the difference betwewn
TIFF @ 2000X1500
and a
JPG @2000X1500

They look very identical but the TIFF is around 900K and the JPG is around 200K (if my memory is right)

What size are you using for every day picture? I think that HQ is great, I can take 84 picture with my 64 meg card ( I have 2 card) and the quality is ok.

Thanks for you helpd
maximebeauvais is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Feb 5, 2003, 11:01 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 292
Default

MAX,
TIFF is the image taken, with the post-camera-manipulation data intact.
JPEG is a compression standard that takes away information its algorithms have determined will make the least impact in the overall quality. You will see the diff if you print large or highly detailed images.
I use RAW or TIFF for most shots i intend to print large (over 11"X17")
But for 90% of the time, the highest jpeg setting works for me.
geof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 11:22 AM   #3
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 39
Default

Hi Max,

Conventional wisdom is to set your camera to the highest quality JPG setting, which in your case would be SHQ1 or SHQ2.

TIFF has a theoretical quality advantage, but most people could not tell the difference in an 8x10 photo without looking under a magnifying glass.

Once you transfer the images to you computer, keep your original JPG files in one place and make a copy if you want to edit it. This way your originals are always intact.

If you want to do a lot of editing on a photo it's a good idea to convert it from the JPG used in your camera, to TIFF, PNG, or BMP, which hold up better as they are resaved many times.
lwhitney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 11:31 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 3,585
Default

I owned the c3000 camera for several years, it is a good camera. I use the HQ mode and can print excellent pics up to 81/2X11. If you are planning to print larger pics then choose SHQ or TIFF. You will not notice any difference in picture quality below 81/2X11 prints.
gibsonpd3620 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 12:09 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

IMHO, you should always shoot at the highest quality (largest file size) JPEG unless you have a reason to do otherwise. If that reason is not being able to get enough pictures on the memory you have, the solution should be to get more memory. Memory is cheap, and getting cheaper. With my camera (Casio 3000), I haven't found TIFFs worthwhile and I don't have the option of using RAW.

The situation I have found where even a slightly greater JPEG compression matters is in trying to replace a blank/gray sky using the magic wand tool. The boundry between something like a roof line and the sky is not as clean with higher compression and can show up as an obvious artifact when a nice sky is dropped in. There can also be some artifacting in the sky itself which means you have to use a higher tollerance with the magic wand and that causes problems at the border.

It is true that you probably won't notice the difference looking at pictures with slight difference in JPEG compression. The differences that are there can bite you if you try some kinds of editing.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 2:59 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 173
Default comment

When you edit in Photoshop to improve your photos every pixel
counts and that why I shoot in TIFF.

It doesnt make sense to use JPeg which compresses the image file in a lossy manner and then use resize to rebuild more pixels so you can print a larger image.


Jim
Jim Ghiringhelli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 3:25 PM   #7
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 39
Default

Jim I respect your opinion and think it makes sense for your scenario.

However I'd be willing to bet that 95% of people would be very happy with the highest JPG quality setting on their camera.

Currently, you need fairly expensive flash memory to shoot a 100 TIFFs at a time, and it slows down your shot recovery time significantly.

I imagine in the next few years this will be a non issue, and cameras will start to adopt lossless compression formats like JPG2000 or PNG.

At that point lossy JPG will probably become a thing of the past except for web display and low bandwidth applications like PDAs and cell phones.
lwhitney is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 3:37 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,162
Default

maximebeauvais... your TIFF file size of 900Kb seems a bit small for a 3Mpix cam? - but I don't know your cam.

If you want to shoot TIFF, are you happy with the time it takes to write and release the cam for the next shot? I'd have thought your TIFF files would be around 10Mbyte, that's about 6 pics on a 64Mb card. Or perhaps I've missed something obvious?

Since this is a SM media only cam, max size 128Mb, you're only going to fit 12 pics on a 128 card -----So are you really going to shoot TIFF max res? If you're coming down in res. to shoot TIFF, why worry about JPEG, you've lost quality anyway.

I think it makes a lot of sense to shoot HQ or SHQ JPEG at 3 Mpix with this cam and 64 Mb cards!! But then I don't own one of these so my reply is a bit theoretical.
voxmagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 4:02 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
BillDrew's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Hay River Township, WI
Posts: 2,512
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lwhitney
...I imagine in the next few years this will be a non issue, and cameras will start to adopt lossless compression formats like JPG2000 or PNG....
I hope they adopt a compressed RAW format instead of either of those to gain better post camera adjustment and more dynamic range. Though probably not unless some marketing folks come up with flashy ways to go WOW-WOW about RAW.
BillDrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Feb 5, 2003, 5:07 PM   #10
NHL
Senior Member
 
NHL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: 39.18776, -77.311353333333
Posts: 11,547
Default

I agree with Bill here. If anyone has the option to pick tiff or raw with their camera, raw should be the one:

1. The raw file is much smaller than tiff
2. raw has all the picture info (no more no less)
3. This was discussed before, raw is still 12-bit colour (tiff is 8-bit from the camera).
4. If you messed up, there's still a slight chance to recover in raw back on the PC (not so with tiff)

Tiff get you a standard format so you can send it to a printshop quickly, but it's not the most optimum nor efficient. There's really only two choices highest jpeg quality if you are memory limited or raw if you own a microdrive or large fast cards! :?
NHL 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 8:22 AM.