Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/11/04

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG
From: len-1 at comcast.net (Leonard Taupier)
Date: Sat Nov 4 08:31:32 2006
References: <002401c6ffa0$c79fb2a0$6501a8c0@asus930> <001301c6ffab$ab4e1730$a302a8c0@ted> <454BEB21.4030805@mcclary.net> <000f01c6ffb6$4c719240$a302a8c0@ted> <454C0180.4060200@waltjohnson.com> <668FDF07-1E8E-4160-9E83-B6E0F3B195E8@ncable.net.au> <454CA504.4080501@waltjohnson.com> <454CB890.4090807@mcclary.net>

Elegantly put, Harrison.

Now to address Walts scanning comments. We both use the same scanner  
and shoot the same color film. I have always scanned to tiff on both  
color slides and bw negatives. I have recently experimented with  
scanning Velvia to jpg. I can't find any difference at all in the  
printed output of either file. Also when editing I always save as a  
level 12 jpg unless I'm mailing a file. There is a huge difference in  
the file sizes. The tiff is 55 MB versus 15 MB for the jpg. Am i  
missing something?

Len


On Nov 4, 2006, at 10:58 AM, Harrison McClary wrote:

> Walt Johnson wrote:
>> Alastair
>>
>> One of the things I've notices on the list is people talking about  
>> jpgs. I was under the impression they were a  compression formula  
>> only suitable for some things. Information lost when opened,  
>> modified and then closed and then reopened. I've always scanned  
>> and saved as tiffs which to me is a raw (?) file.  Don't get me  
>> wrong, jpgs are fine for looking at online (computer screens) but  
>> not whet one wants to print for quality. I've been surprised when  
>> seeing digital cams using that format to compress space and give  
>> the impression of vast storage. Wonder how many gigs one could  
>> squeeze onto a frame of Fuji 50? :-)
>
> Walt,
>
> If one opens jpg file edits and saves as a jpg some information is  
> lost, yes.  This all depends on how much compression is used in the  
> jpg saving.  At level 12 you will see no difference in a tiff and  
> the jpg that has been saved once.   For most of my clients who I  
> have to ftp or e-mail files to I usually go as far as a level 8 as  
> that still retains most of the image information but makes transfer  
> times reasonable.  Even at level 8 I often am transferring 100 megs  
> of information to people.
>
> The key is to not open edit and resave as a jpg.  This is why I  
> shoot RAW when I am sending a jpg file it is a first generation jpg  
> so it has not lost much information.
> I do not know if I explained this very well...I have not had my  
> coffee yet.
>
>
> -- 
> Harrison McClary
> Harrison McClary Photography
> harrison@mcclary.net
> http://www.mcclary.net
> ImageStockSouth - Stock Photography
> http://www.imagestocksouth.com
> Tobacco Road: Personal Blog:
> http://web.mac.com/whmcclary/iWeb/tobacco-road/Blog/Blog.html
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


Replies: Reply from firkin at ncable.net.au (Alastair Firkin) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Reply from harrison at mcclary.net (Harrison McClary) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Reply from vondauster at earthlink.net (Will von Dauster) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
In reply to: Message from hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from harrison at mcclary.net (Harrison McClary) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from tedgrant at shaw.ca (Ted Grant) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from firkin at ncable.net.au (Alastair Firkin) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from walt at waltjohnson.com (Walt Johnson) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)
Message from harrison at mcclary.net (Harrison McClary) ([Leica] Re:M8 DNG vs DMR DNG)