Welcome to ScubaBoard, an online scuba diving forum community where you can join over 205,000 divers diving from around the world. If the topic is related to scuba diving, this is the place to find divers talking about it. To gain full access to ScubaBoard (and make this large box go away) you must register for a free account. As a registered member you will be able to:
Participate in over 500 dive topic forums and browse from over 5,500,000 posts.
Communicate privately with other divers from around the world.
Post your own photos or view from well over 100,000 user submitted images.
Gain access to our free classifieds marketplace to buy, sell and trade gear, travel and services.
Use the calendar to organize your events and enroll in other members' events.
Find a dive buddy or communicate directly with scuba equipment manufacturers.
All this and much more is available to you absolutely free when you register for an account, so sign up today!
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the ScubaBoard Support Team.
If your original is a jpeg and you open with PS and you do a 'save as' (so the edited version is saved as a seperate file) and close the orginal (with no saving), does that degrade the original file?
Essentially the original file would have been opened & closed in PS unless just opening and viewing a jpeg file degrades it?
If you do not change the file name or do not "save as" to a different folder, the modified file replaces the original file, even when using "save as". What I mean is clicking "save as" and then clicking "save" is the same as just clicking "save" from the file drop down.
If you do not change the file name or do not "save as" to a different folder, the modified file replaces the original file, even when using "save as". What I mean is clicking "save as" and then clicking "save" is the same as just clicking "save" from the file drop down.
Sorry for not being clearer, but I really meant it to be 'save as' to a different file name and/or a different folder.
I also shoot everything RAW but I shoot a Canon 40D. As has been mentioned, it DOES NOT require a lot of extra effort to finalize photos after shooting RAW. I simply download my files and open them with Photoshop CS2. Usually there is almost no editing that needs to be done but it is very easy to change white balance and make other adjustments and cropping if you desire. You then simply save them as JPEG or TIFF depending on whether you plan to just keep them for memories or submit them to a contest.
If your camera does not support RAW however, as you mentioned, I would probably just shoot in JPEG as it is much faster and smaller files than shooting TIFF. There are a lot of contest winners that were shot as a JPEG. However, for those photos you want to edit realize that each time you "save" that image in JPEG you lose a little quality from compression. In other words if you crop the image and save it, followed by adjusting white balance and save it, and then adjust colors/levels/etc and save it you can lose a significant amount of quality. In that case, I would save the file as a TIFF until you are completely finished working with it. Once you have the file exactly the way you want it you can either keep it as a TIFF or save a JPEG image so that it is a smaller file.
Just my 2 cents as a humble amateur photographer. I didn't sleep in a Holiday Inn Express last night but some of my best dive buddies are professional underwater photographers and I've tried to learn from them.
You can compress TIFF with no loss of quality as well. LZW does compress but when working with photos the gain is not as much as compressing as a zip file.
My workflow consists of working in 16 bit, saving as 8 bit and then duplicating to provide a low res web image and saving the original file as a TIFF using LZW. The file is about 65% of the size of a Photoshop file.
You have to understand the digital process! It doesn't do any good to have a picture with high resolution and view it on a low resolution screen! CRT's have about 3 million color possibilities compared to a LCD screen that is capable of 17.6 million color variations! So how are you're going to view the picture or even how are you going to print it? On a printer that can only produce 300 DPI or on the professional side Epson R3800 at 2880DPI? So what is your poison?
My point is what good does it do to look at a high res picture on a screen that has 72DPI or even 90DPI or PPI when you have rendered the picture at 300DPI? So Don your demo may not show anything in the way of a major difference because of the quality of the viewers screen!
You can compress any file but Tiff Files do not compress unless you do it! Jpeg files compress every time they are SAVED becoming smaller with each save! Since your only saving once in the camera it is not too much of a problem in consumer or point and shoot cameras! After all you are taking a 5 to 8 MP shot and again if it is going to the web it will be or be viewed as 72 to 90 DPI. So 600x400 pixels at 72 dpi is about 100k size jpeg file and it wouldn't do any good to upload a 4mb Tiff file to be viewed at low res! SO for web I make a copy of each picture in my work flow by resizing the DPI from 300 to 72dpi and size the photo at 8x10!
It takes me less than a minute per picture to make it look as I want it to for 99% of my stuff. I would spend at least that in water trying to adjust the camera for the particular shot if I were to record in jpg - would MUCH rather do that above water than while diving - particularly as you go deeper. I get less and less competent to make those judgements as the depth increases. On the surface I am much smarter than at 100 feet.
The advantage to RAW is in the marginal shot. Something that didn't quite work, but captures something you really want a good picture of. With Raw you have ALL the data the camera captured to work with - a jpg image by definition has discarded a significant portion of what the CCD recorded before you even start.
The only time I would agree with your instructor is if all you were taking were "snapshots", but if your camera has Raw capability likely you are trying to do more than take snapshots.
He shoots in Jpeg, edits in Tiff, then saves as Jpeg...?
Yep, always want to save originals in a folder, then make a copy of that folder for editing, and keep those originals until you really really sure you are finished. I go a little further and make copies of everything to a Flash Drive seperate from the laptop for the duration of the trip.
correct. there is no loss (or negligible loss) to your image if you edit as a TIFF rather than RE-saving a JPEG.
TIFF is too slow unless you have a total set up, but RAW is the best way to capture any underwater image or surface! Easy to edit and PS will open it as shoot! So you don't do as much editing of a RAW than any other type! You just get to adjust for the best image! Shot RAW if your camera will allow it too! No charge for the Lesson! As far as an instructor teaching "Too complicated to edit RAW" Find another teacher!
it's not that it's too complicated! he knew that not everyone can shoot in RAW! and if you can you have to edit each photo! at least that was my understanding! maybe I am in the wrong here!?!
I have never shot in RAW! my camera does not do have that feature! so maybe I am not one that should have commented on this! I have done a few JPEG to TIFF back to JPEG edits but have not had to a chance to print any yet!
Maybe his main point was not to lose any quality by shooting in JPEG and then Re-saving your JPEG which is where your degradation comes in!
He was not a big fan of Photoshop unless you're a graphic designer (we were an intro to photo class)! He suggested Photoshop elements 6.0!
*using all the "!'s" because I know how much you like them...!
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Originally Posted by Fastmarc
Reply With Quote
TURTLES TURTLES RA RA RA TURTLES TURTLES HA HA HA MMM.....I LOVE TURTLES 
He shoots in Jpeg, edits in Tiff, then saves as Jpeg...? 
