Upload your photos, chat, win prizes and much more
Can't Access your Account?
New to ePHOTOzine? Join ePHOTOzine for free!
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more for free!
If I shoot in Tiff format and upload it to my computer I get a 14mb Tiff picture file. If I shoot in RAW format, upload it to my computer and then convert it, I get a 14mg Tiff picture file. If I shoot in Jpeg format, upload it to my computer and then convert it, I get a 14mb Tiff picture file. Is there no difference, little difference or much difference in the quality of the three resulting Tiff picture files?
Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.
All the images are of the same size in terms of pixel count, and thus will generate approximately the same file sizes when saved, ie, around 14Mb as Tiff.
Tiffs are a 'lossless' format, ie there is no loss in quality (detail) no matter how many times it is saved, unlike Jpeg which involves the compression of data. The end result is that with a Jpeg, you will lose a certain amount of detail every time the image is resaved,even on the finest settings, where as with a Tiff the image will remain the same. Raw files are 'as seen' by the camera, and generally require the manufacturers software to read these files. Thus if you shoot raw images, the resulting files are a great way of storing the data 'as seen' by the camera, but are better off converted to another more convenient format for manipulation in whatever software you use, ie Photoshop.
Hope this makes some sense to you...
Thanks, Miles, I do understand lossie and lossless formats. However, my question was in the above sequence of events would there be any noticeable difference in the 3 ways of achieveing a Tiff file on my computer, bearing in mind that the Jpeg is as uploaded from the camera and then saved as a Tiff.
When the image is saved within the camera as a Jpeg there would be a small loss, though if that Jpeg was then saved as a Tiff file, no further loss would occur. In answer to your question, there would be little difference, although of the three, the Jpeg that you converted to Tiff format should be the lowest image quality.
I will try and answer your question in another way. All 3 ways will give you approx the same image file once you have saved it on the computer, but will they be the same quality? I use a canon digi which does not have Tiff,so I will just point out the differences in Jpeg and Raw. In jpeg mode the camera does certain processing to the image such as contrast,saturation and sharpening, which you can't undo on the computer. However the raw version is a true dig negative with nowt put in or taken out.
You do all the processing. This gives you greater control of the image.
The choice is yours, if you want to take charge shoot raw. If you want the camera to take charge, shoot jpeg. Dont worry about the file size. Its image quality which is important.
Thank you both for your answers. It would seem that there is just a very small difference in quality at the end result.
I have found by experience that in many instances, exposure and focusing for 2, that the camera usually gets it better than I do. So my feeling is that if I use Jpegs and let the camera make the initial settings, any changes I require can be made in Photoshop.
Thanks again for your interest.
ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.
Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.
You must be a member to leave a comment
Get the latest photography news straight from ePHOTOzine in your email every month and win prizes!
1st March 2014 - 31st March 2014
Check out ePHOTOzine's inspirational photo month calendar! Each day click on a window to unveil new photography tips, treats and techniques.
View March's Photo Month Calendar