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

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 17, 2006, 7:53 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 242
Default

I need some advice on formats. My camera can do jpeg or tiff only, fine or standard. I have been shooting jpeg(fine) always, but I submitted some pics for 8x10 and the camera store told me I would be better of shooting tiff, and they were not responsible for noise.

Is tiff worth the extra memory space compared to jpeg?

Will tiff take longer to record before I am able o shoot again?
Angel L. is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 17, 2006, 8:04 AM   #2
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

With your Sony, I'd stick to jpeg. Reviewers have noted that the tiff files are softer (so you'd need more post processing), with the fine jpeg files doing great in comparison with little in the way of artifacts.

Also, write times will slow down dramatically if you shoot in tiff.

From tests I've seen, it looks like the camera takes in excess of 40 seconds to process a tiff image (versus around 2 seconds for a JPEG fine image).


JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2006, 8:10 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Ronnie948's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 721
Default

I had a Nikon 990 and it took a very long time to put the tiff image on the card. I just always started using jpg fine. I could print up to 11 X 14's with no problems. I did my own post processing with photoshop and when the picture was done I would save it as a tiff. If I needed Walmart or Sams to print I would take a CD with the finished tiff files to them. Never had a problem doing it that way.

You just can't take a picture right out of a camera and expect the guy at the lab to process the picture for you if you want it any good. You have to process it yourself to get a quality 8 X 10 print from them.

I have a Nikon D200 now and still ready My pictures Myself if sending out for prints I do not do at home.
Ronnie948 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 17, 2006, 2:39 PM   #4
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Angel L. wrote:
Quote:
I need some advice on formats. My camera can do jpeg or tiff only, fine or standard. I have been shooting jpeg(fine) always, but I submitted some pics for 8x10 and the camera store told me I would be better of shooting tiff, and they were not responsible for noise.

Is tiff worth the extra memory space compared to jpeg?

Will tiff take longer to record before I am able o shoot again?
I know little about your Sony camera, but JPEG produces no more noise then TIF. Noise is a product of high ISO or an underexposed image. JPEG CAN produce artifacts, but these are minimal in the finest settings.

Jim has posted that THIS camera is "soft" in TIF. This is a severe condemnation indeed. I wonder why this occurs? Makes me doubt the camera as a whole.

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2006, 8:02 AM   #5
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Savannah, GA (USA)
Posts: 22,378
Default

DBB wrote:
Quote:
Jim has posted that THIS camera is "soft" in TIF. This is a severe condemnation indeed. I wonder why this occurs? Makes me doubt the camera as a whole.
Sony apparently keeps processing of the TIFF files to a minimum (for example, sharpening and contrast). They will sharpen up fine using an editor.

It's actually an outstanding camera with a very nice lens (resolving more detail on resolution charts for a long time, compared to any other 5 Megapixel fixed lens model you could buy). Very few cameras of similar resolution can match it.

Also, the brightness of it's lens is *still* hard to beat in a fixed lens camera, since it's got f/2 available on it's wide end, only dropping off to f/2.4 on it's long end (where you'll have the same angle of view you'd have with a 190mm lens on a 35mm camera).

JimC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 18, 2006, 10:13 AM   #6
DBB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 2,483
Default

Thanks for clarifying this Jim.

I of course leap for joy over RAW and I'm happy that I don't have to deal with the above choices...()

Dave
DBB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2006, 12:41 AM   #7
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 4
Default

if i got a jpeg image then edited it and saved it into tiff format, do i loose some details from the original jpeg image? i asked this because from what i know if you edited a jpeg image then saved it as jpeg also, you loose some details.
booghaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2006, 3:56 AM   #8
E.T
Senior Member
 
E.T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 921
Default

booghaw wrote:
Quote:
if i got a jpeg image then edited it and saved it into tiff format,* do i loose some details from the original jpeg image?* i asked this because from what i know if you edited a jpeg image then saved it as jpeg also, you loose some details.
Unless you really need to get it out in TIFF format there's no point in using it that way because of its huge file size.

But inside editing process it's best to save in lossless format, because you might often end up editing image in one day, then saving it and continuing editing on next day.
Lossy compression can destroy details when you save, so you should minimize amount of savings using it and save image again as JPEG only when you have done editing.
(+preferably use smaller compression for saving edited photo and save more heavily compressed photos you might need for example for web-use separately)
E.T is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Apr 4, 2006, 9:54 AM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,093
Default

Let me just add a bit here, because I was confused originally about what TIFF would do for me in my camera. You may have the same confusion.

Raw data is saved as the (usually 12-bit) A/D values that the camera acquires before any other processing is applied. There will normally be fewer red and blue pixels than green ones. When you save raw data, you save what the camera acquired. You can then process on your computer to your heart's content -- changing white balance, adjusting exposure levels within some limits, etc. Once you've finished with your adjustment, you can output an image that contains the usual 8,8,8 bit RGB values that we think of as the pixels in the image.

JPEG data has taken that strange 12-bit format of raw, applied white balance, noise suppression, edge enhancement, etc in a manner that may be open to user influence through the camera settings, and outputs an 8,8,8 RGB image that has undergone lossy compression. Note, however, that the BIG lossy step is going from 12-bit to 8-bit data, which is not part of the JPEG lossy compression -- it's a preliminary step to applying the JPEG compression.

TIFF data goes through all the steps of the JPEG files, except that it does not apply the lossy compression part. So you have already thrown away 4 of the 12 bits in the raw data steam, noise reduced, white balanced, sharpened, etc. the data. The difference between JPEG and RAW is mostly in these steps. So you don't really preserve noticeable quality in your data by saving as TIFF instead of maximum quality JPEG. To my mind, TIFF is just not worth the size on most cameras. Notice that JimC has had experience witha Sony camera that actually applies less processing to the TIFF data than to the JPEG data, so under that specific (and rare, as far as I know) circumstance TIFF may be worth the large increase in file size for especially important images.


tclune 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 1:32 PM.