nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

Is it better to edit photos in Tiff than JPEG? (LR is down the road for me)

FredB Loc: A little below the Mason-Dixon line.

Better for whom?

1) TIFF tends to make large files, in comparison to other methods of digital imagery, as it uses a NON-COMPRESSED structure. It is not uncommon to see 80MB or larger TIFF files.
2) JPEG files will degrade due to re-compression each time they are opened, edited, and saved back. Thoughts vary on how much they degrade before a visual difference is noted, but the fact remains that they DO lose quality each time. Note I used the word EDITED. Just opening/viewing and then closing does not cause a re-compression.

So which is best? If you plan on opening,editing, and closing a particular file dozens of times, and don't plan on sending it to anyone via email, or posting on an internet forum, blog, or other mechanism, then use TIFF.

If you will only edit once or twice, and need to email or post the picture, use JPEG.

JPEG is the internet standard, closely followed by PNG.

HTH

nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

FredB - Thank you. I guess I left out the fact that I was thinking the photos would be shot in RAW. Shooting RAW is encouraged for some types of photos. If JPEG loses quality in editing, would it be better to convert and edit in Tiff?

jeep_daddy Loc: Prescott AZ

Yes. If your only two choices are to edit in tiff or jpg then I'd go with tiff. Tiff files have more data (up to 32 bit) than jpg (only 8 bit). Tiff images can be layered, jpg can not. Much less chance to get banding in a tiff than a jpg. Much less data loss during your editing than jpg.

But after you PP your tiff images, as stated in the above post, it's better to flatten the tiff and save as a jpg to send via email or upload to the net. Also, most store print labs need jpgs for printing. Save your tiff with the layers so you can always go back and make changes to the layers if need be. If you don't save the tiff it can sometimes be impossible to re-create that same effect. So save the tiff after editing and then use jpgs to create useable images.

Edit:

Nat,

I see that you are confused as to what to do with raw, tiff, and jpg. I'm guessing that you converted your raw to tiff so that your editing program can handle the larger better file format and less data loss. I also see that you don't have LR4 yet. So this all makes sense now, but when you get LR4 you can skip the step of converting the raw to tiff. So you know the work flow here's a simple explanation.

1. shoot in raw
2. download to computer
3. use the program that came with your camera to edit the raw image as much as you need to.
4. convert to tiff only if you need to do more editing such as layering and compositing or filtering etc. etc.
5. once the raw or tiff is as complete as possible save them - then do a save-as and make jpg to print, send, share.

nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

Thanks Jeep D.

rpavich Loc: West Virginia

It doesn't "lose quality in editing" but instead "loses quality every time it's resaved"

If you are only editing it once...then don't worry about it.

nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

OK. So, now to my other question. I understand (hopefully) that when you shoot RAW, you are capturing more information than you do when you shoot JPEG. And this allows you more options when editing..i.e., there is more detail to work with. If I shoot a RAW photo and convert it to jpeg, will all the information (detail) in that RAW photo be transferred in the conversion to jpeg?

GoofyNewfie Loc: Kansas City

No. With raw you can adjust the exposure so that you get detail in the highlights and shadows that adjusting from a straight jpeg conversion can't do. It's a big reason for shooting raw with landscape, architectural, commercial & fine art images. There are other reasons but this is just one.

phil7782 Loc: Rancho Cucamonga, CA

Maybe you already know this, but it's always good to get a refresher from a different point of view.

Here is a link to a good article explaining Lossy vs Lossless file formats.

http://www.howtogeek.com/142174/what-lossless-file-formats-are-why-you-shouldnt-convert-lossy-to-lossless/?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=010413

Worth the time to read.

nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

Thanks, I just read it. It didn't mention Tiff, tho. But I understand that is a lossless format.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

In LR if you shoot RAW you are editing the RAW file non-destructively. Until you save it as an export it stays a RAW file. You can also import files from the camera as DNG files and the same caveat remains. Now in LR if you utilize say NIK plug-ins they work on a COPY that is a TIFF file, you still have your original RAW file

EstherP

Jeep-Daddy, should #3 not be "use LR to edit the raw image...." when he gets LR4?

EstherP

nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

I just edited a RAW photo in DPP and then converted it to JPEG. So happy! As they say in New England, "Light dawns over marblehead." BTW, I'm a female. :D

nat Loc: Martha's Vineyard, MA

Thanks everyone for your patience and generosity!

EstherP

Oops... Then again, the only "Nat" I know is a boy; his name short for Nathan...
EstherP