Steve Silverman wrote:
> --- On Sat 04/16, Douglas B. McKay < [EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
>
>> The battle between space, quality and perfection has been raging in my
head
>> (and on my hard drives) for about 15 years now. When I first started
>> scanning and archiving my images, I HAD to compress them because my
>> available space was limited and CD-ROM blanks cost $100 each. Now that my
>> space isn't so limited, I still use JPG compression (at a less severe
level)
>> to archive my images.
>
> Unless you are a professional photographer, the JPG format is more than
> adequate for most users. For web presentation or photo CD/DVDs you are
hard
> pressed to see any difference in JPG/TIFF/PNG images. JPG images are fine
> for 4x5 prints. Those who worry about losing the "original" bits in their
> images due to JPG compression and simply kidding their selves.
I agree with what Steve wrote, and I'll take it one step further. JPEG is
fine for 8x10 prints. Not only that but JPEG with 1600 X 1200 pixels,
which is often called 2 Megapixels, even though it's only 1.92 Megpix,
also creates great 8x10 prints.
A few years ago, my wife and I took a cruise to Europe to celebrate our
25th anniversary. Naturally I wanted to photograph this once in a lifetime
adventure. So I brought along my Canon A20 digicam with the above
mentioned specs. It worked well. I have lots of photos of that trip, as
well as others taken with that camera that look perfectly fine to me
when printed out on glossy paper using an injet printer. I've also taken
pix of a niece's wedding with that camera and printed out 5x7s and
a few 8x10 (the special pix) and given them to my sister. She was
very happy with the printed pictures I gave her.
Can you get better results with a better printer? Yes. Can you get
better results with more resolution and/or shooting in "raw mode" or
saving as tiff? Yes again. But I think most mortals would be hard
pressed to notice a difference even in a side by side comparison.
Now if you're interested in cropping and only using part of the image
for an 8x10, yes again more pixels and or not using JPEG will give
you some benefit. Also if you want to print larger than 8x10. But
for most pictures that one wants to save with Legacy and display
on a computer screen, JPEG is fine IMO.
On the other hand Doug McKay has a point if one considers that
he initially wrote about the "battle between space, quality and
perfection". JPEG is not perfect. It is "lossy". PNG is a better
standard IMO, and I may someday move to it. For now I get
wonderful JPEGs out of my camera, that I am very happy with.
jr
Legacy User Group Etiquette guidelines can be found at:
http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp
To find past messages, please go to our searchable archives at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/legacyusergroup%40mail.millenniacorp.com/
To unsubscribe please visit:
http://www.legacyfamilytree.com/LegacyLists.asp
