Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New profile posts
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Learning
Computers and Software
What file type do you keep?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="WayneF" data-source="post: 522752" data-attributes="member: 12496"><p>I shoot raw, and archive the raw files. Seems the only reasonable way. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /> Then after processing, I output temporary JPG for viewing/printing purposes, which are expendable, discarded without concern. Because another JPG is always available from the raw. So if a subsequent additional edit is ever needed, discard the temp JPG, edit the raw again, and output a new JPG for the new purpose. A JPG with a reasonably high quality level. Why would we ever want a low quality JPG? <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>Viewing and printing does not need TIF files. Tiff would be good if you planned to additionally edit them, JPG is poor for that. But if we do the editing in the raw editor on the raw files, and then output temp JPG copies for viewing/printing, there would be no need for TIF concerns IMO. If in some unlikely event, you discover a need to edit a JPG, that is the time you would wish for the TIF file.</p><p></p><p>Sounds like you have already done your JPG trails, and judged them less satisfactory. That's my experience too.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="WayneF, post: 522752, member: 12496"] I shoot raw, and archive the raw files. Seems the only reasonable way. :) Then after processing, I output temporary JPG for viewing/printing purposes, which are expendable, discarded without concern. Because another JPG is always available from the raw. So if a subsequent additional edit is ever needed, discard the temp JPG, edit the raw again, and output a new JPG for the new purpose. A JPG with a reasonably high quality level. Why would we ever want a low quality JPG? :) Viewing and printing does not need TIF files. Tiff would be good if you planned to additionally edit them, JPG is poor for that. But if we do the editing in the raw editor on the raw files, and then output temp JPG copies for viewing/printing, there would be no need for TIF concerns IMO. If in some unlikely event, you discover a need to edit a JPG, that is the time you would wish for the TIF file. Sounds like you have already done your JPG trails, and judged them less satisfactory. That's my experience too. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Learning
Computers and Software
What file type do you keep?
Top