RonFrank
Contributor
He has sold numerous canvas prints of images shot in jpg with a Canon S60.
There are a large number of pretty good cameras that do not shot in raw, so the original file (jpg) would be the best to archive, right?
Not necessarily. The possibility of saving over the jpg exists, and every save is lossy.
The Canon S60 supports RAW. Not sure why anyone shoots in jpg with a camera that supports RAW unless they are running out of card space.
As far as pixels go; what is the difference in pixel count between a jpg that is 12x18 @ 200 dpi and a tif that is 12x18 @ 200 dpi?
Not really sure, I'd have to look, but Tif is not a very efficient format.
I have compared tif prints to jpg prints, on both my own Canon S-900 printer and the local Costco's printers, and I like the look of the jpg prints better.
I have the exact opposite experience, but I've never used Costco, and generally don't use Tif either. I find that when printing anything smaller that 11x14 the file format is not as critical.
Jpg print files require less storage, print faster and look better in the test prints I have made. If you don't do any tests you are left with a belief!
I've done quite a bit of testing/printing over the years, and can not agree with your conclusion.