CatMarley Loc: North Carolina

You may try, then again if you like the image the way it is and do not feel it needs improvement . . . Then you may not think shooting raw and post processing is worth the trouble. Not everyone thinks him/her/self a great photo artiste.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Two things happen to diminish the quality of an image that is initially recorded as a raw file. First your raw file is either 12 bit or 14 bit in depth. Jpegs are only 8 bit. Lots of data lost just by doing that. Subtle transitions in tone and color, if they are in the original image, may suffer.

Then there is the issue of compression. If you merely open an image and close it without saving the changes to the file are zero. If you save, meaning that you open, uncompress the file, then save it, recompressing, it, you will create "compression artifacts" which involve loss of detail and sharpness, introduction of a color cast, and overall image degradation in the worst cases.

This article explains what artifacts are and what they may look like:

http://blog.topazlabs.com/jpeg-artifacts-vs-image-noise/

whitewolfowner

Well said; you put it better than I did.

whitewolfowner

This whole forum is about shooting better photos and helping those that are trying to learn or are uninformed.

whitewolfowner

Have yet to see a program run on algorithms set for the whole of possibilities to be able to beat a custom fix done by a human being. Doubt it ever will exist. It's all about knowing quality and not settling for second and third best.

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

True, but the title of this particular thread is:
".jpeg compression"

whitewolfowner

The key thing here is the part of your statement where you say: "the quality doesn't suffer much". Actually in most cases it does suffer a lot, and the question is why would someone do to their photos to make them inferior. Kinda defeats the whole purpose of being a photographer, does it not.

whitewolfowner

If you really feel that way, why buy a good camera when being a snap shooter is just fine?

whitewolfowner

Obviously, you do not understand digital photography and how it works. Anyone can destroy a photo by not doing the processing steps as they should be. Learn the proper way and you will be shocked as to how much you have been missing.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

There are two threads to your statement. When the data is not needed for the final product you can throw away data. Anyone who shoots raw is completely familiar with this concept. We edit, finalize the edits then create a jpeg from it.

I agree with the second idea - yes, you spend $$$ on a camera, why not start off with the best possible chance at getting a good representation of what you shot? Automatically selecting jpeg as an output format from a camera makes several assumptions:

1. The settings you used to take the picture were the best for that picture.
2. The in camera processing is better than any other method.
3. You are satisfied that the image that comes out of the camera is the best it can be, and that further processing is not necessary.
4. You are fastidious enough to change your settings other than exposure and white balance) for every different shot, so that you have the best settings possible for the shot.
5. You lack the knowledge/interest/motivation to pursue a higher level of quality in your images, or don't believe that they can be improved.
6. You have a client that requires instant turnaround - there is no time to shoot raw, adjust and convert
7. You have a client that has you taking pictures of proprietary equipment and/or processes, and you are handed media to record on, and must surrender it at the end of the shoot.
8. Along the same lines as #7, you shoot a series of intimate photos of a model or models, and they require you to surrender the media after the session, to ensure that none of the images end up on a porn site
9. You are doing forensic work, and the chain of custody must be maintained - so media comes out of the camera and is logged into evidence, and cannot be altered in any way.

So there are multiple reasons why someone would take jpegs out of a camera as final output.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

What on earth are you talking about and who are you directing this comment to? What exactly do you think I've been missing?

Does this indicate that I am clueless and totally missing out on something?

https://www.flickr.com/photos/gene_lugo/

One of us is definitely clueless . . . Just sayin'

whitewolfowner

If you are doing forensic work and it cannot be altered then it has to be shot in RAW. Jpegs are altered, thus violating the law that says they cannot be altered. This does not even make sense.

whitewolfowner

Sorry, but anyone who believes that jpegs are better than RAW files properly fixed in software is clueless and/or lacks so much of the knowledge needed to do digital photography in either an professional or serious amateur environment.

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Why are you continuing to insist that I am believing that jpegs are better than raw. I haven't shot a jpeg since 2006. Again, what the hell are you talking about?

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Jpegs are allowed in forensic work, but they can be shot as tiff in certain cameras. There is no "law" that says an image cannot be altered. Images can be altered to enhance the view/detail. You can adjust color, contrast, crop, sharpening, brightness, blur removal, etc. The key is to be able to record the most amount of detail and preserve it through the processing of the image. And of course, the original image must be preserved, unedited, to present alongside the edited one. Lossy formats, like jpeg are discouraged for some applications. When submitting any image that has been digitally enhanced, a journal specifying what adjustments were made must be presented along with the original.

Out of camera jpegs shot at large size and highest quality are often used by law enforcement and the legal system.

You can read about the process and exactly what is and what is not allowed here:

https://www.swgit.org/pdf/Section%201%20Overview%20of%20SWGIT%20and%20the%20Use%20of%20Imaging%20Technology%20in%20the%20Criminal%20Justice%20System?docID=35

https://www.swgit.org/pdf/Section%203%20Field%20Photography%20Equipment%20and%20Supporting%20Infrastructure?docID=47

https://www.swgit.org/pdf/Section%201%20Overview%20of%20SWGIT%20and%20the%20Use%20of%20Imaging%20Technology%20in%20the%20Criminal%20Justice%20System?docID=35

You are not making any sense, obviously have not done any of this kind of work, and have no basis for making any of the criticisms you are leveling at me. I suggest you quit while you are ahead. You are making less and less sense with each post.