Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital Cameras (Point and Shoot) > Panasonic / Leica

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Mar 4, 2005, 11:24 AM   #1
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 108
Default

I have two 512MB SD cards plus another 128MB, all of the high speed variety so I'm not so lacking in storage. Lately, I've been tinkering with tiff format pictures but they take up so much space (I can get about 30 on my larger cards). I can only really see using tiff when shooting in my little studio of electronic parts but for outside shooting where I most likely to take a lot of pics and maybe even use burst mode (which you can't really do with tiff).

I'm curious if anybody uses tiff format and if so, when and what is your practical usage experiences? I've even considered shooting tiff but at lower res but that seems counter productive. thoughts and ideas welcome.
eddie_dane is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old Mar 4, 2005, 11:38 AM   #2
Senior Member
 
Stoney79's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 314
Default

I'm using jpg because I often shoot a lot of pictures. I don't see that the tiff qualityjustifies the 6x increase of size. In fact, I can hardly see any differences in quality at all.
Stoney79 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 11:42 AM   #3
Senior Member
 
Goldar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 145
Default

Not a big fan of TIFF. It's a lossless format vs. lossy jpeg. It's probablythe most commonly used archival format butbig file sizes and imperceptable - if any,image quality improvement make it a format I never use. Personally, don't know why in the world TIFF (of all formats) is even used with digicams. Jpeg- yes; RAW - yes. But TIFF? Guess it's a marketing "the competition" is using it thing.File conversionto an archival format canbe done as a batch process if you chose to do it, and JPEG2000 is a better choice imo.
Goldar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 11:48 AM   #4
Senior Member
 
nooner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,452
Default

For once I agree with Goldar. TIFF is overrated. JP2K is just as good and won't take up a lot of HD space.:arrow:
nooner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 12:30 PM   #5
Senior Member
 
genece's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 2,111
Default

Maybe I do not understand why jpg2000... when you can not view it with windows.

I know I can view it with PS or Irfanview but that seems like a lot of work to me.
genece is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 12:43 PM   #6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,396
Default

The original post was to do with CF cards and in camera use, I do not know of any camera that can write jpg2000.

IMHO: if your options are tif or Jpg, I would select JPG_high, tif files are just too huge.

Peter.
PeterP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 1:36 PM   #7
Senior Member
 
Goldar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 145
Default

genece wrote:
Quote:
Maybe I do not understand why jpg2000... when you can not view it with windows.

I know I can view it with PS or Irfanview but that seems like a lot of work to me
It's for archiving, not viewing. View the jpegs, archive with jpeg 2000. Tiff files are just too ridiculously large. You don't "have" to archive if you're careful about how you use your photo-editor so you're not constanty saving and re-saving images.
Goldar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 1:58 PM   #8
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Indian Rocks Beach, FL
Posts: 4,036
Default

I agree that TIFF is an impractical format for general use. 14.4Mb for a 5Mp image is just too much. Besides card space there are shooting limitations. Raw is very useful as there is so much more you can do with the image. But Panasonic in their infinite wisdom doesn't seem to think it is worthwhile.

If you shoot in JPG you can't do better than to archive the original images in JPG format. If you modify an image, "save as" in a loseless format like PNG, TIFF or TIFF with compression (loseless), PSD etc. But always save the originals as digital negatives.

slipe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 2:04 PM   #9
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 108
Default

slipe wrote:
Quote:
If you shoot in JPG you can't do better than to archive the original images in JPG format. If you modify an image, "save as" in a loseless format like PNG, TIFF or TIFF with compression (loseless), PSD etc. But always save the originals as digital negatives.
I agree, I'm a big practitioner of saving the original JPEG image, mainly for fear of losing EXIF information if I am not careful with my conversions.

eddie_dane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Mar 4, 2005, 5:46 PM   #10
Senior Member
 
boyzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,544
Default

nooner wrote:
Quote:
For once I agree with Goldar. TIFF is overrated. JP2K is just as good and won't take up a lot of HD space.:arrow:
Yep Agree
boyzo 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 5:57 PM.