> > From: mike wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: 2006/06/16 Fri AM 07:53:18 GMT > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > > > > > From: Bruce Dayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Date: 2006/06/15 Thu PM 07:59:08 GMT > > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > Subject: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > > > Tom, > > > > I think you're right that there is a very slight difference between > > the Tiff and jpg saving for 1st generation. The bigger problem that I > > see is that both of them are 8 bit while the sensor is 12 bit. So you > > are throwing a lot more not shooting raw than you are between jpg and > > Tiff. I guess I'm saying that if you are willing to throw away 4 bits > > by not using raw, the remaining difference between Tiff and jpg right > > out of the camera are probably not worth the bother. Tiff is giving > > you the storage requirements of raw and the clipping of data of jpg. > > In some ways, the worst of both worlds. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > -- > > Bruce > > On the DL2, there is no option to save as Tiff but the > converter gives you the option of changing the RAW file to > either 8 or 12 bit Tiffs. > > m
16bit Tiffs. > > > > > > > Thursday, June 15, 2006, 12:48:32 PM, you wrote: > > > > TC> Of course not... :-) I didn't mean to imply the .jpg quality setting > > in the > > TC> camera (although that would obviously have a bearing). I meant the > > color, > > TC> contrast, lighting, etc., of the subject to be captured. > > > > TC> All I'm saying is that assuming all .jpgs are lossy, to any degree, and > > TC> knowing that I don't necessarialy understand, nor can predict what the > > TC> algorithm will do, I chose to shoot .tiffs, based on the fact that > > storage > > TC> is relatively inexpensive. > > > > > > TC> Tom C. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >>From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > >>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> > > >>Subject: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > >>Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:32:17 -0400 > > >> > > >> >it all depends on the photo and the .jpg quality one is saving at. > > >> > > >>I've never shot JPEG at anything but the highest quality level. > > >> > > >>Kenneth Waller > > >> > > >>----- Original Message ----- > > >>From: "Tom C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >>Subject: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > >> > > >> > > >> >I have but it all depends on the photo and the .jpg quality one is > > >> >saving > > >> > at. I must admit I saw it really fast when using a Sony Mavica. I > > >> > preferred > > >> > .tiffs over .jpgs for this reason and because by their nature .jpgs are > > >> > lossy compression. I felt I was truly getting a '1st gen' image with > > >> > .tiffs, where with .jpgs out of camera, I already had an image that may > > >> > not > > >> > contain everything that was shot. > > >> > > > >> > This may be a little simplistic or a splitting of hairs, but it made > > >>sense > > >> > to me. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Tom C. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> >>From: "Kenneth Waller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> >>Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List <[email protected]> > > >> >>To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" <[email protected]> > > >> >>Subject: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > >> >>Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 13:09:28 -0400 > > >> >> > > >> >> > No quality losses when saving the first JPEG after editing. > > >> >> > > >> >>I guess I knew that but haven't observed the difference. Has anybody? > > >> >> > > >> >>Kenneth Waller > > >> >> > > >> >>----- Original Message ----- > > >> >>From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> >>Subject: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > No quality losses when saving the first JPEG after editing. > > >> >> > > > >> >> > -Adam > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > Kenneth Waller wrote: > > >> >> >> I guess I don't see the advantage of shooting TIFF over highest > > >> >> >> quality > > >> >> >> JPEG. What's to be gained? > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Kenneth Waller > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- > > >> >> >> From: "Don Williams" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > >> >> >> Subject: Re: Shooting Digi in JPEG Mode > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> I have yet to shoot a single picture in JPG. I've had the camera > > >>since > > >> >> >> last year and started shooting TIFF because I had to learn how to > > >>use > > >> >> >> the camera and hadn't a clue about handling RAW files anyway. I had > > >> >>only > > >> >> >> one card for months -- a 512 Kingston and it was enough. But I work > > >> >> >> mainly indoors and can unload a card without trouble. I did venture > > >> >> >> out > > >> >> >> with the small card once or twice and didn't have trouble. I now > > >>have > > >> >> >> three cards ) 1/2, 1 and 2 gig) and don't really need so many. But > > >> >> >> like > > >> >> >> all electronic things they can fail, so having several is good > > >> >>planning. > > >> >> >> I shoot only RAW now and am perfectly satisfied with the results. > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Don W > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> Shel Belinkoff wrote: > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >>>I really don't see getting more photos on a card as an issue. That > > >> >>would > > >> >> >>>be the least of my concerns. 2GB of space will net about 185 pics > > >> >> >>>in > > >> >>RAW > > >> >> >>>using the DS - that's certainly a fair number of pics for a day. > > >>Cards > > >> >> >>>are > > >> >> >>>cheap now - a 1gb card can be purchased for less than the cost of a > > >> >>roll > > >> >> >>>of > > >> >> >>>film and processing with prints. After all, if I'm going to do > > >> >> >>>photography, > > >> >> >>>I'd want the best possible results, and if shooting raw will > > >> >> >>>provide > > >> >> >>>that, > > >> >> >>>then raw it is. If JPEG will provide appropriate quality, then > > >> >> >>>there's > > >> >> >>>nothing wrong with shooting in that format. > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>>Perhaps it's just me being irksome, but it seems odd that you'd go > > >>out > > >> >>to > > >> >> >>>make photographs and just dump what could be good pictures because > > >>you > > >> >> >>>don't want to take the time to learn a few simple techniques to > > >>shoot > > >> >>in > > >> >> >>>a > > >> >> >>>manner that's appropriate to the scene and situation. Why waste > > >>your > > >> >> >>>time > > >> >> >>>making photos then? You took the time to learn how to use film > > >> >> >>>cameras > > >> >> >>>appropriately, learned what film choices to make, sought out good > > >>labs > > >> >> >>>and > > >> >> >>>processing ... > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>>Are you really "using up" the room on your card? The files get > > >>dumped > > >> >> >>>into > > >> >> >>>the computer at some point, and the space is reusable. Of course, > > >>if > > >> >> >>>you're using a single card with 512mb or less space, well, maybe > > >>your > > >> >> >>>point > > >> >> >>>has merit. > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>>Shel > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>>>And another is that you can get more photos on a card :) > > >> >> >>>> > > >> >> >>>>I did a bit of RAW shooting but 95% of the time I'm shooting > > >> >> >>>>jpg and happily so. > > >> >> >>>>IF I don't see what I like in my jpgs I just dump 'em.. I > > >> >> >>>>think I'm probably not > > >> >> >>>>really understanding the process well enough to make it work > > >> >> >>>>for me. But if the > > >> >> >>>>light is right, and you could have nailed it with a slide, > > >> >> >>>>the extra room you > > >> >> >>>>are using up on your card shooting raw doesnt seem worth it. > > >> >> >>>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >>> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > > > >> >> > -- > > >> >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >> >> > [email protected] > > >> >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >>-- > > >> >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >> >>[email protected] > > >> >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -- > > >> > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >> > [email protected] > > >> > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >> > > >> > > >>-- > > >>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >>[email protected] > > >>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > [email protected] > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > ----------------------------------------- > Email sent from www.ntlworld.com > Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software > Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > ----------------------------------------- Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
