jpeg v tiff

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

In article ,
"david williams" wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

In a nutshell -

Tiff compression uses loss-less compression - that means all of the
original data can be recreated when you de-compress it. Similar to
something like a Zip file.

Jpeg compression uses "lossy" compression - it achieves higher
compression ratios, by discarding some of the information from the image
which you will notice least. Therefore you can't recreate the image as
perfect as it was, when you decompress. But the idea is to strike a
balance and discard as much info as you can without impacting the
subjective quality for whatever you're going to use it for. This is
akin to MP3 compression.

There's a lot more to it than this, but the above is approximately
correct.

David

In article ,
"david williams" wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

In a nutshell -

Tiff compression uses loss-less compression - that means all of the
original data can be recreated when you de-compress it. Similar to
something like a Zip file.

Jpeg compression uses "lossy" compression - it achieves higher
compression ratios, by discarding some of the information from the image
which you will notice least. Therefore you can't recreate the image as
perfect as it was, when you decompress. But the idea is to strike a
balance and discard as much info as you can without impacting the
subjective quality for whatever you're going to use it for. This is
akin to MP3 compression.

There's a lot more to it than this, but the above is approximately
correct.

David

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 22:18:54 -0000, "david williams"
wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW


No, since its jpg's that loss data not Tiff's (unless you apply a
loosly compression to them)

JPG is a compressed file format and TIF is not. However, unless you are working
for NASA or something, it's hard to see any difference. This summer, using a
Sony F-828 at 8 mpx, I shot a number of frames of exactly the same thing first
in JPG and then in TIF and made high-quality enlargements of both. My eye
couldn't see a difference.

JPG is a compressed file format and TIF is not. However, unless you are working
for NASA or something, it's hard to see any difference. This summer, using a
Sony F-828 at 8 mpx, I shot a number of frames of exactly the same thing first
in JPG and then in TIF and made high-quality enlargements of both. My eye
couldn't see a difference.

In article
,
David French wrote:

In article ,
"david williams" wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

In a nutshell -

Tiff compression uses loss-less compression - that means all of the
original data can be recreated when you de-compress it. Similar to
something like a Zip file.

Jpeg compression uses "lossy" compression - it achieves higher
compression ratios, by discarding some of the information from the image
which you will notice least. Therefore you can't recreate the image as
perfect as it was, when you decompress. But the idea is to strike a
balance and discard as much info as you can without impacting the
subjective quality for whatever you're going to use it for. This is
akin to MP3 compression.

There's a lot more to it than this, but the above is approximately
correct.

The major problem with JPEG is when people make serial saves with it.
Each save results in more loss of pixels. this would occur primarily
when one is editing and modifying digital pictures. One save is
probably of no consequence, perhaps two.

There is a new JPEG system called JPG2000 which I have heard does not
lose as many pixels as JPEG. J2k is available at www.fnordware.com and
works as a plug in with PhotoShop and PhotoShop Elements. I have no
personal experience with it, but I assume that some information is
available on it on the PhotoShop groups.

--
Panta Rei

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:11:58 -0600, Keith Weinstein
wrote:

david williams wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

JPEGs usually only save at 72 dpi, while TIFF can go over 300 dpi.

Dpi had nothing to do with it. I can save JPGS at whatever dpi I want
in PS

On Sun, 31 Oct 2004 18:11:58 -0600, Keith Weinstein
wrote:

david williams wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

JPEGs usually only save at 72 dpi, while TIFF can go over 300 dpi.

Dpi had nothing to do with it. I can save JPGS at whatever dpi I want
in PS

"clw" wrote in message
...
In article
,
David French wrote:

In article ,
"david williams" wrote:

Hi I've read that saving as tiff files as oposed to saving in jpeg
causes
less loss of data. Can anyone explain this to me?
thanks
DW

In a nutshell -

Tiff compression uses loss-less compression - that means all of the
original data can be recreated when you de-compress it. Similar to
something like a Zip file.

Jpeg compression uses "lossy" compression - it achieves higher
compression ratios, by discarding some of the information from the image
which you will notice least. Therefore you can't recreate the image as
perfect as it was, when you decompress. But the idea is to strike a
balance and discard as much info as you can without impacting the
subjective quality for whatever you're going to use it for. This is
akin to MP3 compression.

There's a lot more to it than this, but the above is approximately
correct.

The major problem with JPEG is when people make serial saves with it.
Each save results in more loss of pixels. this would occur primarily
when one is editing and modifying digital pictures. One save is
probably of no consequence, perhaps two.

There is a new JPEG system called JPG2000 which I have heard does not
lose as many pixels as JPEG. J2k is available at www.fnordware.com and
works as a plug in with PhotoShop and PhotoShop Elements. I have no
personal experience with it, but I assume that some information is
available on it on the PhotoShop groups.

I have been using it to save files (nef files from d70) in PSE 3 - no plugin
needed. It is lossless (if you select lossless), supports 16 bit color, and
files are 22mb (tiff and psd ~34mb). It can't support layers like the last
2 formats, but this is not always needed. I think is has a lot of
potential, and perhaps future cameras will shoot in this format. I'm
curious what others think?


--
Panta Rei