Questions on film scanning, TIF files

Others have already explained how you got a 137 megabyte file.

Yes, JPEG is "lossy compression", but just a tiny bit of compression ...
which you will NEVER be able to detect, at all, in any way ... will
produce a HUGE reduction in file size (as much as 90%) while retaining
both the resolution and color depth.

This size (137 MB) is a problem as many of us have thousands of photos.
The fact is that with a file size of 1/10 of what you have, you can do
anything that you are ever likely to want to do.

wrote:
Dear Experts,

Recently, I bought a Nikon coolscan 5000, and
did some scanning of some 35mm transparencies and negs.

I scanned at 16 Bit, used Digital ICE, and saved
in TIF format.

Interestingly, the file sizes were 137 megs big!

I thought that this was odd, because the size of the
images themselves we 3946 x 5959 pixels,
which, if you multiply these, is about 23 megs.

If I scan at 8 bit, it about 1/2 the size.

Why is the TIF file almost 6 times the size of
the image size? What other information
is being stored in TIF?

What are the advantages of TIF format?


Thanks a lot

(Note: I'm really NOT asking how to get smaller file sizes.)

On Jan 21, 2:43 pm, wrote:
Dear Experts,

Recently, I bought a Nikon coolscan 5000, and
did some scanning of some 35mm transparencies and negs.

I scanned at 16 Bit, used Digital ICE, and saved
in TIF format.

Interestingly, the file sizes were 137 megs big!

I thought that this was odd, because the size of the
images themselves we 3946 x 5959 pixels,
which, if you multiply these, is about 23 megs.

If I scan at 8 bit, it about 1/2 the size.

Why is the TIF file almost 6 times the size of
the image size? What other information
is being stored in TIF?

What are the advantages of TIF format?

Thanks a lot

(Note: I'm really NOT asking how to get smaller file sizes.)

TIF files are the actual image size. Jpegs from the camera have been
compressed with a lossy format, not a bad thing on the first save, but
continually editing and saving jpegs will seriously degrade the image.
The reason you have a 134mb file is that 16bits of data is twice the
size of a 8bit file. This has some advantages when editing the file
,when applying levels or curve to correct color or tonal range 8bit
files break up much easier than 16bit files. Look at the histogram in
levels and you can tell. The curve presented should be one continous
color, not a bunch of lines.
Don't save 16bit files with LZW compression, for some reason it
increases the size of the files even more. LZW works well with 8bit
files, saves them down about 2/3 the un compressed size, LZW is a
lossless compression.

Tom

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:01:11 -0500, Barry Watzman
wrote:

Others have already explained how you got a 137 megabyte file.

Others haven't top poasted...why are you? Are you stupid or do you
just get yer jollies off on ****ing up thread continuity?

Yes, JPEG is "lossy compression", but just a tiny bit of compression ...
which you will NEVER be able to detect, at all, in any way ... will
produce a HUGE reduction in file size (as much as 90%) while retaining
both the resolution and color depth.

WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding. Further, while I'm sure an
AMATEUR like you won't be able to notice the difference of a JPEG with
a compression factor of say 10, an EXPERIENCED graphic designer most
certainly CAN tell that there's a BIG difference. And if you ever
decide to start making PRINTS of your photos...well at that point even
an AMATEUR like yourself should be able to notice a pretty big
difference...unless you plan on just shrinking them down.

This size (137 MB) is a problem as many of us have thousands of photos.
The fact is that with a file size of 1/10 of what you have, you can do
anything that you are ever likely to want to do.

Actually considering how cheap 400 gig drives are right now, coupled
with the fact that blank DVDs are also ass cheap, I don't see that
storing your photos in a lossless format would be any problem at all.

Personally though I use PNG myself as opposed to TIFF.

--

Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog


Hatter Quotes
-------------
"You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
best."

"I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
with it."

"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."

"Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."

"Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the **** up!"

"Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
bad."

"There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n such...mmmm..."

"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."

"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"

"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."

"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."

"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."

"People are pretty ****ing high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."

"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."

"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."

"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."

"Those who record history are those who control history."

"I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
don't get sent to me...I come for you."

"Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."

"Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
function?"

"Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
indicates an increase in Webtv users."

"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:01:11 -0500, Barry Watzman
wrote:

Others have already explained how you got a 137 megabyte file.

Yes, JPEG is "lossy compression", but just a tiny bit of compression ...
which you will NEVER be able to detect, at all, in any way ... will
produce a HUGE reduction in file size (as much as 90%) while retaining
both the resolution and color depth.

WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding. Further, while I'm sure an
AMATEUR like you won't be able to notice the difference of a JPEG with
a compression factor of say 10, an EXPERIENCED graphic designer most
certainly CAN tell that there's a BIG difference. And if you ever
decide to start making PRINTS of your photos...well at that point even
an AMATEUR like yourself should be able to notice a pretty big
difference...unless you plan on just shrinking them down.

I don't see how to invoke this hypothetical lossless encoding from
Photoshop or any other program I have. Any suggestions?

And I notice that several professional labs ask that you upload your
files for printing *in jpeg form* at quality level 10, and promise that
nobody will ever see the difference.

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:01:11 -0500, Barry Watzman
wrote:

Others have already explained how you got a 137 megabyte file.

Others haven't top poasted...why are you? Are you stupid or do you
just get yer jollies off on ****ing up thread continuity?

Yes, JPEG is "lossy compression", but just a tiny bit of compression ...
which you will NEVER be able to detect, at all, in any way ... will
produce a HUGE reduction in file size (as much as 90%) while retaining
both the resolution and color depth.

WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding. Further, while I'm sure an
AMATEUR like you won't be able to notice the difference of a JPEG with
a compression factor of say 10, an EXPERIENCED graphic designer most
certainly CAN tell that there's a BIG difference. And if you ever
decide to start making PRINTS of your photos...well at that point even
an AMATEUR like yourself should be able to notice a pretty big
difference...unless you plan on just shrinking them down.

At 10 to 1 you will never see the difference in a print, this photo was
compressed at 10 to 1 and you have to look very closely to see any
difference with the original at all.
http://www.sewcon.com/largephotos/jp...1_compress.jpg

What is more that is 1/20 the size of a 16 bit / color tiff.

No way am I going to spend the time uploading a 16 bit / color tiff
when the jpeg will work just as well, even at 10 to 1 compression.

Scott

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding.

Whilst the JPEG standard provides for lossless encoding, I've yet to see a
program which supports it.

"if" wrote in message
...
Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding.

Whilst the JPEG standard provides for lossless encoding, I've yet to see a
program which supports it.


JPEG 2000 supports it, but there seems to be little interest in it.
Traditional JPG can be set to lose very little, but there is at very least
some tiny amount of loss each time the file is saved.

On 23 Jan 2007 22:21:00 GMT, if wrote:

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding.

Whilst the JPEG standard provides for lossless encoding, I've yet to see a
program which supports it.

Uh, last I checked both Paint Shop Pro (since at least version 9) and
Photoshop (since at least ver CS2) both support lossless JPEG
encoding...and in fact I'm also fairly certain that there are MANY
camera manufacturers who offer lossless JPEG encoding as an
alternative to RAW.

--

Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog


Hatter Quotes
-------------
"You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
best."

"I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
with it."

"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."

"Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."

"Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the **** up!"

"Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
bad."

"There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n such...mmmm..."

"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."

"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"

"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."

"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."

"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."

"People are pretty ****ing high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."

"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."

"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."

"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."

"Those who record history are those who control history."

"I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
don't get sent to me...I come for you."

"Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."

"Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
function?"

"Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
indicates an increase in Webtv users."

"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )

On Jan 23, 2:39 pm, Onideus Mad Hatter
wrote:
On 23 Jan 2007 22:21:00 GMT, if wrote:

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding.

Whilst the JPEG standard provides for lossless encoding, I've yet to see a
program which supports it.Uh, last I checked both Paint Shop Pro (since at least version 9) and
Photoshop (since at least ver CS2) both support lossless JPEG
encoding...and in fact I'm also fairly certain that there are MANY
camera manufacturers who offer lossless JPEG encoding as an
alternative to RAW.
I don't know of any cameras that offer lossless jpeg encoding. And if
they did it would
not be a real alternative to RAW.

Scott

On Tue, 23 Jan 2007 14:08:09 -0600, David Dyer-Bennet
wrote:

Onideus Mad Hatter wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 21:01:11 -0500, Barry Watzman
wrote:

Others have already explained how you got a 137 megabyte file.

Yes, JPEG is "lossy compression", but just a tiny bit of compression ...
which you will NEVER be able to detect, at all, in any way ... will
produce a HUGE reduction in file size (as much as 90%) while retaining
both the resolution and color depth.

WRONG! JPEG supports lossless encoding. Further, while I'm sure an
AMATEUR like you won't be able to notice the difference of a JPEG with
a compression factor of say 10, an EXPERIENCED graphic designer most
certainly CAN tell that there's a BIG difference. And if you ever
decide to start making PRINTS of your photos...well at that point even
an AMATEUR like yourself should be able to notice a pretty big
difference...unless you plan on just shrinking them down.

I don't see how to invoke this hypothetical lossless encoding from
Photoshop or any other program I have. Any suggestions?

And I notice that several professional labs ask that you upload your
files for printing *in jpeg form* at quality level 10, and promise that
nobody will ever see the difference.

Well like I said, if yer an AMATEUR...you probably won't notice a
difference. It's sort of like, when I first started doing video
capture stuff, hell to me 320x240 at 2,000kbps seemed like really good
quality...but the thing is, the more of it I did and the more I
exposed myself to digital video...the higher my standards became...the
more I started to notice the artifacting, the loss in color quality,
the rainbowing, the block noise, etc, etc, etc. That's why I ALWAYS
recommend to people that they use the highest quality that's
available/possible...it's not for the deficiency that you're dribbling
at now...it's for the regret you'll gain with experience and evolving
standards and equipment.

One of the most unfortunate instances of that in my life was when my
parents took all of the historical family video footage (in Super8)
and had this "professional" outfit convert the material to VHS (this
was back in the early 80s). They told my parents that there wouldn't
be any noticeable loss in quality...and on the **** grade TVs that
were available at the time...it's true, one couldn't notice much
difference...so they converted em and then got rid of the
originals...and for those that aren't familiar, the process at the
time essentially destroyed over HALF of the original film quality
which is VERY MUCH noticeable on the high definition displays of
today.

--

Onideus Mad Hatter
mhm ¹ x ¹
http://www.backwater-productions.net
http://www.backwater-productions.net/hatter-blog


Hatter Quotes
-------------
"You're only one of the best if you're striving to become one of the
best."

"I didn't make reality, Sunshine, I just verbally bitch slapped you
with it."

"I'm not a professional, I'm an artist."

"Your Usenet blinders are my best friend."

"Usenet Filters - Learn to shut yourself the **** up!"

"Drugs killed Jesus you know...oh wait, no, that was the Jews, my
bad."

"There are clingy things in the grass...burrs 'n such...mmmm..."

"The more I learn the more I'm killing my idols."

"Is it wrong to incur and then use the hate ridden, vengeful stupidity
of complete strangers in random Usenet froups to further my art?"

"Freedom is only a concept, like race it's merely a social construct
that doesn't really exist outside of your ability to convince others
of its relevancy."

"Next time slow up a lil, then maybe you won't jump the gun and start
creamin yer panties before it's time to pop the champagne proper."

"Reality is directly proportionate to how creative you are."

"People are pretty ****ing high on themselves if they think that
they're just born with a soul. *snicker*...yeah, like they're just
givin em out for free."

"Quible, quible said the Hare. Quite a lot of quibling...everywhere.
So the Hare took a long stare and decided at best, to leave the rest,
to their merry little mess."

"There's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly
horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip
their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand
sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible
images burned into their tiny little minds'."

"How sad that you're such a poor judge of style that you can't even
properly gauge the artistic worth of your own efforts."

"Those who record history are those who control history."

"I am the living embodiment of hell itself in all its tormentive rage,
endless suffering, unfathomable pain and unending horror...but you
don't get sent to me...I come for you."

"Ideally in a fight I'd want a BGM-109A with a W80 250 kiloton
tactical thermonuclear fusion based war head."

"Tell me, would you describe yourself more as a process or a
function?"

"Apparently this group has got the market cornered on stupid.
Intelligence is down 137 points across the board and the forecast
indicates an increase in Webtv users."

"Is my .sig delimiter broken? Really? You're sure? Awww,
gee...that's too bad...for YOU!" `, )