Discarding jpegs due to multiple edits?
Apr 3, 2019 17:35:45 #
I have read/been told that every time you edit a jpeg file you lose some information. I am not questioning this fact. However, some people imply this is a problem; others say no big deal. When I save my jpegs, I do so at the highest quality the program allows.
My question: are there Hoggers who have discarded formerly good jpeg pictures because they became degraded over time with multiple edits? I am curious if this is a real world problem or more a theoretical concern. If you have lost pictures, can you estimate the number of discrete editing sessions they underwent.
I assume the degradation becomes more noticeable as the print size increases, correct?
My question: are there Hoggers who have discarded formerly good jpeg pictures because they became degraded over time with multiple edits? I am curious if this is a real world problem or more a theoretical concern. If you have lost pictures, can you estimate the number of discrete editing sessions they underwent.
I assume the degradation becomes more noticeable as the print size increases, correct?
Apr 3, 2019 17:38:57 #
https://petapixel.com/2010/02/04/saving-jpeg-photos-hundreds-of-times/
--Bob
--Bob
Dragonophile wrote:
I have read/been told that every time you edit a j... (show quote)
Apr 3, 2019 17:39:46 #
Dragonophile wrote:
I have read/been told that every time you edit a j... (show quote)
Why intentionally degrade images to any degree?
Why edit JPEG files? Serious question.
Mike
Apr 3, 2019 17:45:28 #
Dragonophile wrote:
I am curious if this is a real world problem or more a theoretical concern.
I assume the degradation becomes more noticeable as the print size increases, correct?
I assume the degradation becomes more noticeable as the print size increases, correct?
Yes, it is very much theoretical - just as getting some noticeable advantage from shooting raw is today also !!
Yes, it would be more noticeable at larger printings .....but, again more theoretical .....but it COULD happen - but if you don't tell I won't either
.
Apr 3, 2019 17:47:50 #
Blenheim Orange wrote:
Why intentionally degrade images to any degree?
Why edit JPEG files? Serious question.
Mike
Why edit JPEG files? Serious question.
Mike
I think I have made a max of 3 edits on the same JPEG - it happens ! ......Why edit ANY files ??
..
Apr 3, 2019 17:48:16 #
Blenheim Orange wrote:
Why intentionally degrade images to any degree?
Why edit JPEG files? Serious question.
Mike
Why edit JPEG files? Serious question.
Mike
To crop, straighten horizon, lighten up shadow areas, raise contrast, remove telephone wires, etc etc. In other words, the same reasons you might edit a raw file. I have had to go back & edit old jpegs that were created on my laptop computer after getting a new standalone monitor that showed they were too dark.
[If I am understanding your question, you are saying a good photographer gets them perfect from the camera & has no need to edit. OR, you are saying that a good photographer should only shoot raw because there is no degradation. Either way, that doesn't respond to my original question.]
Apr 3, 2019 17:56:36 #
It is in the Title....Edit to alter or cut....
By how much of a problem this becomes is down to you.
Not something to lose sleep over. Merely an incentive to take 'better' images. (Ah the dream!!!)
keep it fun
By how much of a problem this becomes is down to you.
Not something to lose sleep over. Merely an incentive to take 'better' images. (Ah the dream!!!)
keep it fun
Apr 3, 2019 18:09:04 #
rmalarz wrote:
https://petapixel.com/2010/02/04/saving-jpeg-photos-hundreds-of-times/
--Bob
--Bob
Interesting. The picture was compressed EVERY time it was saved (10/12) and I saw no great degradation in the woman's face, but data information was lost in blocks. By that I mean her face seemed as sharp at the end as at the beginning, but just with a small block of data missing. Wonder what the outcome would have been if they had saved 500 times in 12/12?
Apr 3, 2019 18:11:01 #
rmalarz wrote:
https://petapixel.com/2010/02/04/saving-jpeg-photos-hundreds-of-times/
--Bob
--Bob
I wish I had learned this when I first started shooting digital. If you want to shoot JPEG, then get in the habit of saving as a TIFF every single time you edit.
On high quality JPEGs, loss of quality is visible after three saves in areas of fine detail, by my personal tests. These results are obviously exaggerated, but if there is a constant degradation, why do it?
I haven’t personally experimented with JPEG to TIFF conversion, but in theory, I think it should be lossless.
Andy
Apr 3, 2019 18:15:47 #
I've edited thousands of jpegs over the years and not noticed any degradation after a small number of edits (and I always check at 100% before submitting to microstock agencies)
Apr 3, 2019 18:25:55 #
Dragonophile wrote:
I have read/been told that every time you edit a j... (show quote)
Just like RAW files you should never work on an original file - make copies. Yes jpeg is a lossy file and is already compressed. Too much manipulation will degrade the image. Minimal manipulation is best and only on a copy of the original. That way you can always go back, make another copy, and start over if you screwed up. That's this man's opinion anyway.
Apr 3, 2019 18:27:33 #
Apr 3, 2019 18:39:10 #
PLEASE, I DO NOT WANT A RAW VRS JPEG DISCUSSION. I have seen enough of those. You don't like jpeg, fine. But this is NOT the thread to explain to me and others why we should avoid jpeg.
My question is about real world experiences of those WHO DO USE JPEG in the area of degradation. I am asking if jpeg users have ever had to discard formerly good photos because they saw too much degradation after multiple edits. If so, how many edits? Were they saved at highest quality or compressed more each time?
My question is about real world experiences of those WHO DO USE JPEG in the area of degradation. I am asking if jpeg users have ever had to discard formerly good photos because they saw too much degradation after multiple edits. If so, how many edits? Were they saved at highest quality or compressed more each time?
Apr 3, 2019 18:41:52 #
cascoly wrote:
I've edited thousands of jpegs over the years and not noticed any degradation after a small number of edits (and I always check at 100% before submitting to microstock agencies)
This is the real world type of response I am looking for. Thank you.
Apr 3, 2019 18:50:41 #
Dragonophile wrote:
To crop, straighten horizon, lighten up shadow are... (show quote)
Sorry. I wasn't sufficiently clear. I am not asking why you edit images. Nor am I saying anything about raw files.
Why not edit images in the TIFF format or the proprietary lossless format for the program you are using to do the editing? I never work on the JPEG file, even if it is the only file I have to start with.
Mike
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.