Skiextreme2 Loc: Northwest MA

I can't see the difference either, but can you see the difference between most 12 bit and 14 bit images? But you know the difference is there.

CHG_CANON Loc: the Windy City

Can you?
http://photographylife.com/14-bit-vs-12-bit-raw

10MPlayer Loc: California

I think you answered your own question. Most websites require JPEG. I prefer tiff myself because it's not lossy. I may reconsider and save to PSD after having read the above posts.

speters Loc: Grangeville/Idaho

A jpeg never degrades because it is opened, whoever told you that crap told you wrong!

jcboy3

Not necessarily true. Depends on the application. In fact, it is possible to do nondestructive crops of jpg files which do not degrade the image. These are constrained to the jpg block size. Again, that would be a feature of the application.

blackest Loc: Ireland

To be fair here if i'm going to open a raw file in lightroom and pass it to nik i'll do so as a 16 bit tiff file when i get it back i will send it to my next nik plugin as a tiff file. This way I keep my data lossless and 16 bit while processing. when finished processing the output will be a jpeg.

I think ufraw when converting raw files turns them into 16 bit tiff. Dng which is my cameras raw format is quite closely related to tiff too.

bdk Loc: Sanibel Fl.

JPG only degrades in an editor not in a viewer.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Yes, but what the OP seems to be asking about is the final product. The OP seems to think that JPEG files are like slides - each viewing diminishes it a bit

blackest Loc: Ireland

well thats not true , only editing and saving , if i was using jpeg to transfer to nik each time that would be poor, mainly for the 8 bit rather than compression.

Tif is useful still.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Most photo labs want JPEGs in sRGB color space.

The Internet standard is a JPEG in sRGB color space.

Most of us using Lightroom only save to 16-bit TIFF in ProPhoto RGB color space if we’re moving images to Photoshop for pixel-level editing. From there, we print directly to our printer profiles for maximum quality. Or, we export to 8-bit JPEGs in sRGB.

Otherwise, we print from Lightroom with direct conversion from raw to our printer profiles for maximum quality.

Yes, some commercial CMYK++ shops want 8-bit TIFFs in Adobe RGB color space. Some Neanderthals also want genuine CMYK color separations, although most self-respecting printers are doing RGB to CMYK conversions in their own houses (sometimes automatically in raster image processors) for best results.

You might be surprised to learn that the largest portrait companies in the world use JPEG workflow from camera to print. The key is to get the file near-perfect in exposure and color, right at the camera.

burkphoto Loc: High Point, NC

Amen!

I keep raw files and all intermediates and finished JPEGs of images I use.

DirtFarmer Loc: Escaped from the NYC area, back to MA

A word about TIFF.

TIFF is widely held by many to be the best way to save images, equivalent to raw files, but (possibly) smaller than a raw file.

I would like to point out that although TIFF has valid uses, it is not the equivalent of a raw file. A raw file is the raw data from the sensor, and does not constitute an image until the data have been demosaiced from the Bayer pattern. That process requires application of some parameters, and so the parameters used in the conversion are inherent in the TIFF file. The raw file has no such inherent parameters, so has a wider range of possibilities in postprocessing. Those parameters are in there, whether the TIFF file comes from postprocessing or directly from the camera since all cameras start with raw sensor data and apply the camera settings to generate an image (TIFF or jpg).

The raw file contains data with a 12-14 bit depth and the TIFF file can be 16 bits (although there are 8 bit TIFFs also) so the ability to postprocess a TIFF file is likely to be better than the ability to postprocess an 8-bit jpg. But this does not mean the TIFF has unlimited capacity for postprocessing. Those pesky parameters that were used to generate it from the raw data are still in there and will limit the postprocessing capacity.

I never use TIFF files. Like Bill (above) I keep my raw files as the ultimate source and keep finished jpg's for immediate use.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

Yup. A correct answer. Especially if you consider Linda's entire post.

Architect1776 Loc: In my mind

Because I keep my originals in RAW.

pecohen Loc: Central Maine

[quote=jeweler53]

It's a minor quibble, but they degrade every time you save them. If you edit but don't save you lose nothing. On the other hand if you just open and then save the identical image you do degrade the image.