On 2009-10-02, Norman Silverstone <nor...@littletank.org> wrote:
> I have been following this thread with interest so I decided to do some
> tests. The results may be relevant or not as the case may be but I think
> that they are interesting. My little camera gives a RAW image = 8.6 MB
> and a jpeg image = 2.6 MB. The developed RAW image from UFRaw saved at
> 98% jpeg = 17.2 MB
What do you think are benefits of using jpegs with quality above 95%?
Better use compressed 8-bit sRGB TIFF instead (all minilabs I know
would reject TIFF with *any* compression, though...).
Gimp-user mailing list