If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
Thomas T. Veldhouse added these comments in the current
discussion du jour ... HEMI-Powered wrote: This is a fair statement and I respect you for recognizing that not everone can be a superstar. I also appreciate some corroboration that it is indeed some sort of "advanced" individual who makes the jump from ordinary JPEG to 16-bit or to RAW. Oh ... for God's sake, it was SARCASM. tell you what, save your sarcasm for somebody else, I don't like it. when I reply to you or Wolfgang or any of those I call "elitists", "theorists", or even "image bigots", it is because THEY, and not me, are attempting to impose their will on me or someone else. I don't think that is polite, just, or appropriate behavior especially when so much of what gets discussed his is pretty murkey at times. And, I can see that I have to say EOT to you also. -- HP, aka Jerry |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
HEMI-Powered wrote: OK, but again, Thomas, I interpreted the OP as being a fairly new digital owner and thus a novice on file types, so I just mentioned TIFF as an alternative if their camera supports it. TIFF is universally recognized, although news readers cannot decode it in line, and about its only drawback other than large size is that if you want to save EXIF, you cannot use LZW compression, or at least AFAIK. Hardly any cameras support TIFF. Yes, you can use EXIF with LZW ... the are completely unrelated as far as TIFF is concerned. heavily edited, for brevity Hello, Thomas: Oh, then, I'm so very lucky that my Kodak P850 can do both TIFF and RAW, in addition to JPEG. g Cordially, John Turco |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
HEMI-Powered wrote:
HEMI, could you please post an impage where you can easily see JPEG artifacts at the highest quality your Rebel produces? The reason I ask is, it's hard for me to see JPEG artifacts at Q 95 and 1x1 or 2x1 chroma subsampling. Incidently, I don't think I ever said I've seen an artifact in my Rebel's higher of its two available quality settings. What I said was that some significant percentage at the lower setting DID exhibit artifacts. OK, thanks. This kind of supports my assertion (on another thread) that the initial JPEG encoding imposes little lossage on an image other than what the Bayer-pattern sensor has already imposed. As to Chroma subsampling, my normal setting is 1x2. I will lower the compression number and/or change to 1x1 (none) until I can eliminate the damage as described above. It probably does no good, and might actually harm your image, to switch from 2x1 chroma subsampling to 1x1. (I trust your Rebel is writing 2x1, not 1x1.) |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
Bill Tuthill added these comments in the current discussion du
jour ... HEMI, could you please post an impage where you can easily see JPEG artifacts at the highest quality your Rebel produces? The reason I ask is, it's hard for me to see JPEG artifacts at Q 95 and 1x1 or 2x1 chroma subsampling. Incidently, I don't think I ever said I've seen an artifact in my Rebel's higher of its two available quality settings. What I said was that some significant percentage at the lower setting DID exhibit artifacts. OK, thanks. This kind of supports my assertion (on another thread) that the initial JPEG encoding imposes little lossage on an image other than what the Bayer-pattern sensor has already imposed. My experience with now the 3rd of my digitals - 1st two were EVFs - is that your assertion is right, IF you choose the best quality at a given mega pixels, i.e., lowest compression. As to Chroma subsampling, my normal setting is 1x2. I will lower the compression number and/or change to 1x1 (none) until I can eliminate the damage as described above. It probably does no good, and might actually harm your image, to switch from 2x1 chroma subsampling to 1x1. (I trust your Rebel is writing 2x1, not 1x1.) I'm told that my Rebel writes to 2x1, I was talking about what /I/ choose when I am post-procesing in PSP 9. Each step down the scale makes the file size smaller and presumeably the image a little worse. I have found that 1x2 is a very good compromise for me. You may find that 2x1 works fine. But, as I said, if I cannot fix the artifacts by lowering compression, I will go to 1x1, that almost always takes care of them. -- HP, aka Jerry |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
HEMI-Powered wrote:
I'm told that my Rebel writes to 2x1, I was talking about what /I/ choose when I am post-procesing in PSP 9. Each step down the scale makes the file size smaller and presumeably the image a little worse. I have found that 1x2 is a very good compromise for me. You may find that 2x1 works fine. But, as I said, if I cannot fix the artifacts by lowering compression, I will go to 1x1, that almost always takes care of them. The JPEG FAQ warns that JPEG files should be saved at the same compression settings as before, otherwise artifacts are magnified. I'm not sure if this is also true of chroma subsampling... |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
John Turco wrote:
Hardly any cameras support TIFF. Yes, you can use EXIF with LZW ... the are completely unrelated as far as TIFF is concerned. heavily edited, for brevity Hello, Thomas: Oh, then, I'm so very lucky that my Kodak P850 can do both TIFF and RAW, in addition to JPEG. g I didn't say NO cameras use TIFF. Most that suppot RAW do not, but obviously many do. I am not sure why one would want to shoot TIFF in camera though [as opposed to RAW] unless they simply don't want to use the RAW converson tools. I think I saw recently that the upcoming Nikon D3 will still suppport TIFF. -- Thomas T. Veldhouse We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" wrote:
John Turco wrote: Hardly any cameras support TIFF. Yes, you can use EXIF with LZW ... the are completely unrelated as far as TIFF is concerned. heavily edited, for brevity Hello, Thomas: Oh, then, I'm so very lucky that my Kodak P850 can do both TIFF and RAW, in addition to JPEG. g I didn't say NO cameras use TIFF. Hello, Thomas: I was quite aware of what you said; didn't you notice the smiley, after my sentence? Most that suppot RAW do not, but obviously many do. I am not sure why one would want to shoot TIFF in camera though [as opposed to RAW] unless they simply don't want to use the RAW converson tools. I think I saw recently that the upcoming Nikon D3 will still suppport TIFF. "Hardly any cameras support TIFF." Which seems to contradict your later statement - "but obviously many do" - no? Regardless, I agree with your RAW-versus-TIFF remark. I've only toyed with those modes, briefly, and saw that the P850's RAW files averaged around 9GB, but the TIFF's were all precisely 14,821KB. By contrast, this digicam's largest JPEG images have been about 3.2GB, with the vast majority under 3GB (all the way down to 538KB). Cordially, John Turco |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
John Turco wrote:
"Hardly any cameras support TIFF." Which seems to contradict your later statement - "but obviously many do" - no? No it doesn't. Most cameras do NOT support TIFF. Many cameras support RAW. Regardless, I agree with your RAW-versus-TIFF remark. I've only toyed with those modes, briefly, and saw that the P850's RAW files averaged around 9GB, but the TIFF's were all precisely 14,821KB. Indicating a lack of compression and fixed length metadata (to the nearest KB anyway). By contrast, this digicam's largest JPEG images have been about 3.2GB, with the vast majority under 3GB (all the way down to 538KB). Funny ... my D200 supports JPEG and several modes right along side RAW. However, I have never shot a single JPEG with this camera, so I can not tell you how big the files are ;-) -- Thomas T. Veldhouse We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from the machinations of the wicked. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Compression in JPEG files in digital cameras
Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
JPEG is a lossy form of saving the picture - The Bayer sensor is already lossy, having only one of RGGB at any of four pixel locations, so one could make the argument that JPEG imposes no further loss. You could argue that until you are blue in the face If you shot using raw you'd have a better chance of correcting it. Daniele |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What program is best at JPEG compression? | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 84 | August 7th 07 10:20 AM |
Controlling compression with (Nikon) digital cameras. | [email protected] | Advanced Photography | 4 | January 1st 05 03:11 AM |
Controlling compression with (Nikon) digital cameras. | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 4 | January 1st 05 03:11 AM |
best compression for saving photos in jpeg? | Brian | Digital Photography | 14 | December 24th 04 12:59 PM |
JPEG compression | James Ramaley | Digital Photography | 14 | October 26th 04 01:41 AM |