At 06:58 PM 12/28/2003 -0800, you wrote:
Why use a BMP file to burn the images on a CD when everyone else seems to be
using something other (or are they)? What is gained or lost by using the BMP >
TIFF/PSD scenario? Is better to use a TIFF or PSD right from the beginning, no?
I'd guess that the lab uses BMP because it is the native image for Windows, and they probably figure that most of their customers are windows users and can open BMP files. It's the lowest common denominator.
What you gain with TIFF is the ability to color manage - if you add a color profile and work on a profiled system, in theory the TIFF will look the same on any other profiled system. At least more the same. TIFF's also give you the ability to work with 16 bits of data per channel and they are more portable between systems.
From a practical perspective, the BMP should be fine. My first scanner defaulted to saving BMP files, and I used those files with no ill effects. I'd pull them into Photoshop (or back in those days, Corel Photopaint), do my adjustments, and save them as TIFF's. They worked fine.
- MCC -----
Mark Cassino Photography
Kalamazoo, MI
http://www.markcassino.com
-----
