Compression question

My Oly 5060 has a set of the somewhat usual Raw, TIFF, SHQ, HQ, SQ1,
and SQ2 options.

Here's my question:

Why would SQ1 1600x1200 in the high as opposed to the normal position
turn out larger files than my usual setting 2592x1944 in the HQ
position? Was doing some testing today and was quite taken with the
difference in file size. Are there, then, inherent advantages (or
disadvantages) to shooting at this SQ1 position? In terms of print
quality, overall sharpness, etc. ????????? I'm trying to figure out why
they make this particular option available.

Thanks.

Ron wrote:
My Oly 5060 has a set of the somewhat usual Raw, TIFF, SHQ, HQ, SQ1,
and SQ2 options.

Here's my question:

Why would SQ1 1600x1200 in the high as opposed to the normal position
turn out larger files than my usual setting 2592x1944 in the HQ
position? Was doing some testing today and was quite taken with the
difference in file size. Are there, then, inherent advantages (or
disadvantages) to shooting at this SQ1 position? In terms of print
quality, overall sharpness, etc. ????????? I'm trying to figure out why
they make this particular option available.

Thanks.

The more compression, the greater the chance that there will be some artifacts in the image. Whenever I've bought a new
digicam, I've domne a series of tests at different compression levels, and choose the level of compression just less than
where I begin to see artifacts.

Marvin commented courteously ...

Ron wrote:
My Oly 5060 has a set of the somewhat usual Raw, TIFF,
SHQ, HQ, SQ1, and SQ2 options.

Here's my question:

Why would SQ1 1600x1200 in the high as opposed to the
normal position turn out larger files than my usual
setting 2592x1944 in the HQ position? Was doing some
testing today and was quite taken with the difference
in
file size. Are there, then, inherent advantages (or
disadvantages) to shooting at this SQ1 position? In
terms
of print quality, overall sharpness, etc. ????????? I'm
trying to figure out why they make this particular
option
available.

Thanks.

The more compression, the greater the chance that there
will be some artifacts in the image. Whenever I've
bought a new digicam, I've domne a series of tests
at different compression levels, and choose the
level of compression just less than where I begin
to see artifacts.

Both my old Fuji 4900 and newer Nikon 5700 exhibit
artifacts with a "normal" setting, so I long ago settled
on "fine", even though the images get pretty large (but
not nearly so large as RAW!).

Given any finite amount of memory, its always better to
shoot at higher resolutions and minimal compression. HD
space is dirt cheap and its a lot better to get good pics
than to try to squeeze a few more on the memory stick and
risk crapping out irreplaceable images. IMHO, of course.

--
ATM, aka Jerry

Ron wrote:

My Oly 5060 has a set of the somewhat usual Raw, TIFF, SHQ, HQ, SQ1,
and SQ2 options.

Here's my question:

Why would SQ1 1600x1200 in the high as opposed to the normal position
turn out larger files than my usual setting 2592x1944 in the HQ
position? Was doing some testing today and was quite taken with the
difference in file size. Are there, then, inherent advantages (or
disadvantages) to shooting at this SQ1 position? In terms of print
quality, overall sharpness, etc. ????????? I'm trying to figure out why
they make this particular option available.

Thanks.


Hi...

SQ = Standard Quality - quite high jpeg compression.
SHQ = S(omething) High quality. Much lower compression.

Ken

Thanks guys. I've been doing digital photography for years and
understand the differences, but want to know why files at seemingly
higher compression would be larger than those at lower compression??????
I would have expected smaller and lower quality ones.



Ken Weitzel wrote:


Ron wrote:

My Oly 5060 has a set of the somewhat usual Raw, TIFF, SHQ, HQ, SQ1,
and SQ2 options.

Here's my question:

Why would SQ1 1600x1200 in the high as opposed to the normal position
turn out larger files than my usual setting 2592x1944 in the HQ
position? Was doing some testing today and was quite taken with the
difference in file size. Are there, then, inherent advantages (or
disadvantages) to shooting at this SQ1 position? In terms of print
quality, overall sharpness, etc. ????????? I'm trying to figure out
why they make this particular option available.

Thanks.


Hi...

SQ = Standard Quality - quite high jpeg compression.
SHQ = S(omething) High quality. Much lower compression.

Ken