MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Poll

which quality level do you save your JPG files at

12
117 (88%)
11
8 (6%)
10
6 (4.5%)
9
0 (0%)
8
0 (0%)
lower than 8
2 (1.5%)

Total Members Voted: 110

Author Topic: Which quality level do you save your JPG's in  (Read 21677 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

« on: November 11, 2009, 09:52 »
0
So which is it?

When I edit and save the file I save it as a TIFF so it isn't compressed.  When I upload to a stock site I save a JPG version.  In photoshop you are asked at which quality level you want to save the JPG file.  Some microstock sites say to save it at the highest level (12), others say quality level 10 is good enough.

Which do you use?  The difference in file size on the disk is significant.  For a regular file from the Canon 5D mark II the sizes are

Quality 12 : 10.5 MB
Quality 11 : 5.5 MB
Quality 10 : 3.5 MB

So in regards to storage and FTP uploading it is tempting not to use quality 12.  There is obviously a lot more information in the Quality 12 file size but can you really see a difference?  When opening the JPG files up in photoshop, putting them on top of each other as layers and clicking the hide/view button to toggle I really can't see a different.  Not even with the Quality 10 file.  If you were to save and open and save and open the file numerous times I could see a potential problem, but for a one time save perhaps Quality 11 is an OK middle ground?
« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 10:02 by leaf »


« Reply #1 on: November 11, 2009, 10:01 »
0
Level 12 jpg is almost identical to 8bit tiff, so that's what I use. Except when a site (for example SX) has a size limit, then I either resize smaller and/or save at 10 or 11.

The quality difference between 12 and 11 is really small, but the size difference is quite noticeable.

« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 14:57 by Perry »

vonkara

« Reply #2 on: November 11, 2009, 10:06 »
0
I always save at 12. But it would be nice to see a 100% crop if you have the two images.

« Reply #3 on: November 11, 2009, 10:12 »
0
boy, you guys are making me self conscious about my quality 11 jpgs. 

I deleted my test images but I couldn't tell any difference .. so I am not sure there would be a point in posting them - unless of course it was just me.

vonkara

« Reply #4 on: November 11, 2009, 10:24 »
0
Well I had to save at 10 or 11 before for StockXpert size limit and I also didn't saw a difference. I would say... don't worry lol

« Reply #5 on: November 11, 2009, 10:31 »
0
So which is it?

When I edit and save the file I save it as a TIFF so it isn't compressed.  When I upload to a stock site I save a JPG version.  In photoshop you are asked at which quality level you want to save the JPG file.  Some microstock sites say to save it at the highest level (12), others say quality level 10 is good enough.

Which do you use?  The difference in file size on the disk is significant.  For a regular file from the Canon 5D mark II the sizes are

Quality 12 : 10.5 MB
Quality 11 : 5.5 MB
Quality 10 : 3.5 MB

So in regards to storage and FTP uploading it is tempting not to use quality 12.  There is obviously a lot more information in the Quality 12 file size but can you really see a difference?  When opening the JPG files up in photoshop, putting them on top of each other as layers and clicking the hide/view button to toggle I really can't see a different.  Not even with the Quality 10 file.  If you were to save and open and save and open the file numerous times I could see a potential problem, but for a one time save perhaps Quality 11 is an OK middle ground?

Did the same test and couldn't see any difference either... however, i save at 12.. you never know.. ;D

Patrick  H.

« Reply #6 on: November 11, 2009, 11:29 »
0
There might not be much difference but is there more degradation when you edit and re-save a jpeg that is lower than level 12?  I use 12 most of the time but drop to 11 or 10 if the file goes over 10mb.

« Reply #7 on: November 11, 2009, 11:34 »
0
I assume "12" is the best quality setting? I save at 100 using Lightroom and keep everything in Adobe1998 colorspace until I submit to stock in Srgb.

gbcimages

« Reply #8 on: November 11, 2009, 12:00 »
0
10 for me.

Fotonaut

« Reply #9 on: November 11, 2009, 12:07 »
0
Ten on my part too. In normal production, the difference is not noticable. In print a lot of other factors has far more impact on the outcome.

« Reply #10 on: November 11, 2009, 12:09 »
0
12, but I have accidentally saved at lower and still got those images approved.

KB

« Reply #11 on: November 11, 2009, 12:31 »
+1
I always save at 12.

The difference may not be noticeable, but it is there. The smaller file size isn't due to just "better" compression -- data is gone. Forever lost to the buyer, who will have less headroom available in case they want to make some exposure tweaks.

What is 5MB nowadays anyway, when 1GB costs less than $0.10? Let's see .... That means for less than $1.00 I can save 2000 images at 12 instead of 11. Sounds like a dollar well spent!

lisafx

« Reply #12 on: November 11, 2009, 13:48 »
0
I use 12.  Storage space and bandwidth are both cheap.

vonkara

« Reply #13 on: November 11, 2009, 14:14 »
0
Who's the one who save at lower than 8  :D

lower than 8 - 1 (2.3%)

« Reply #14 on: November 11, 2009, 14:25 »
0
Quote
Who's the one who save at lower than 8

Not me, I save at 12. Jpg is already lossy compressed. I wouldn't want to give anything less, even if there isn't any difference between 11 and 12.

« Reply #15 on: November 11, 2009, 15:17 »
0
We had an action awhile back that ran a "save" and reopened the file - we reopened it 10, 25, 50, 100, 250 times - it doesn't change almost at ALL until 50 resaves. Even at 250 it's barely noticeable.   I save at 10.

« Reply #16 on: November 11, 2009, 15:21 »
0
There used to be a time when printers wouldn't accept jpegs because of the lossy quality issue, only took tifs and eps. Because of this, I save at the highest quality setting.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 16:02 by epantha »


Noodles

« Reply #17 on: November 11, 2009, 15:39 »
0
There used to be a time when printers wouldn't accept jpegs because of the lossy quality issue, only .took tifs and .eps. Because of this, I save at the highest quality setting.

Yeah, printers were very anti-jpeg - almost the opposite these days.

For DVD backup I save the RAW or any non compressed format - for Stock and my Photoshelter storage I use Jpeg highest quality setting.

« Reply #18 on: November 11, 2009, 21:30 »
0
Level 10 for almost everything, unless it's something graphic or lots of contrasting edges on a flat background then 12

We had an action awhile back that ran a "save" and reopened the file - we reopened it 10, 25, 50, 100, 250 times - it doesn't change almost at ALL until 50 resaves. Even at 250 it's barely noticeable.   I save at 10.

That's because you only lost 'information' on the first save, in theory if you don't change anything and re-save with the same compression settings then nothing should change. The problem comes when you crop something that is not a multiple of 8 pixels from the top left or when you make any changes to the content of the image, then only those parts of the image will start to see artefacts, it's all based on 8x8 macroblocks (that's why you can rotate multiples of 90 degrees 'losslessly' if the images are themselves a multiples of 8 pixels in size along both edges)

RacePhoto

« Reply #19 on: November 11, 2009, 22:40 »
0
Level 10 for almost everything, unless it's something graphic or lots of contrasting edges on a flat background then 12

We had an action awhile back that ran a "save" and reopened the file - we reopened it 10, 25, 50, 100, 250 times - it doesn't change almost at ALL until 50 resaves. Even at 250 it's barely noticeable.   I save at 10.

That's because you only lost 'information' on the first save, in theory if you don't change anything and re-save with the same compression settings then nothing should change. The problem comes when you crop something that is not a multiple of 8 pixels from the top left or when you make any changes to the content of the image, then only those parts of the image will start to see artefacts, it's all based on 8x8 macroblocks (that's why you can rotate multiples of 90 degrees 'losslessly' if the images are themselves a multiples of 8 pixels in size along both edges)

The results would have been different if the test had been run, open the file, save as version1, close, open version1, save as version2 Etc. Some people don't understand that it's not if you open and close a file (which think about it... makes no sense)  :) But if you open and save the file, which recompresses it. That's where the problem occurs.
« Last Edit: November 11, 2009, 23:46 by RacePhoto »

« Reply #20 on: November 12, 2009, 03:25 »
0
boy, you guys are making me self conscious about my quality 11 jpgs. 

I deleted my test images but I couldn't tell any difference .. so I am not sure there would be a point in posting them - unless of course it was just me.

How did you know which one to delete ? :)

« Reply #21 on: November 12, 2009, 03:50 »
0

« Reply #22 on: November 12, 2009, 03:51 »
0
boy, you guys are making me self conscious about my quality 11 jpgs. 

I deleted my test images but I couldn't tell any difference .. so I am not sure there would be a point in posting them - unless of course it was just me.

How did you know which one to delete ? :)

The quality setting is saved in the image data/exif info.

Patrick h.

« Reply #23 on: November 12, 2009, 03:52 »
0
boy, you guys are making me self conscious about my quality 11 jpgs.  

I deleted my test images but I couldn't tell any difference .. so I am not sure there would be a point in posting them - unless of course it was just me.

How did you know which one to delete ? :)

The quality setting is saved in the image data/exif info.

Patrick h.

and I named the files image-q10, image-q11, image-q12

« Reply #24 on: November 12, 2009, 09:51 »
0
We had an action awhile back that ran a "save" and reopened the file - we reopened it 10, 25, 50, 100, 250 times - it doesn't change almost at ALL until 50 resaves. Even at 250 it's barely noticeable.   I save at 10.
I'm convinced that I can see the difference in quality between a first and second save. Or maybe I've convinced myself. However, because of this I don't like saving an image twice and never save it a 3rd time.

I usually save my pics at 11, sometimes at 12.

lisafx

« Reply #25 on: November 12, 2009, 11:24 »
0
Racephoto's comparison settled the issue for me.  I was surprised by the difference in the two images. 

Gonna keep saving at 12.

« Reply #26 on: November 12, 2009, 17:01 »
0
As already said, storage is cheap.

I always save a PSD, at original size, and to JPG at 12 - if I have to re-edit, I work from the PSD.  I never resave a JPG.

And if that's not feasible, I've still got the RAW.


« Reply #27 on: November 12, 2009, 22:14 »
0
If you dig into the JPG compression algorithm, you will see that the information reduction is done by combining slightly different adjacent pixels into monochrome squares > 1px. When there is a lot of noisy info in the image, like in trees or grass, the size reduction is much smallerr than with clouds or scenes with many slow gradients, like cars.

One of the JPG quality parameters is the size of the squares.

It follows that you can see a clear effect in slow gradients like skies and clouds (where you can easily see the JPG square artifacts in medium-blue clouds) and on high-contrast luminance edges like dark suits on an overwhite. JPG is bad handling graphics and hence the edges on overwhites, which will show up with more jitter around the edge and into the white area near the border.
This can cause problems for a designer-buyer that wants to re-extract the object from the white.

Conclusion: q12 for overwhites and rasterized graphics, q10 for the rest.

Poncke

« Reply #28 on: February 16, 2013, 05:18 »
-1
12

Microbius

« Reply #29 on: February 16, 2013, 05:45 »
0
Old thread alert!

Poncke

« Reply #30 on: February 16, 2013, 06:02 »
-2
Old thread alert!

So what, the poll and the question is still relevant??

RacePhoto

« Reply #31 on: February 16, 2013, 10:04 »
0
That and I should get a better photo to do the comparison test. The gull wasn't the best choice. But it does show that if there are any minor problems with the image, it makes a difference. I still same Micro at 10 but I should be at 11. The difference gained going to 12 isn't significant. So how's that for a survey answer? Yes, 10 - 11 and sometimes 12.  ;D

It's another one of those, it depends things.

Let me be more specific, large panorama that's 54MP to start with and I can see peoples faces full size a quarter mile away, 10 is just fine. For Microstock 4-6MP images, 10 is just fine. For Alamy I often save at 12. And for myself, editing I stick to TIF and final save is at 10.

Like I said, I should be saving all those at 11 and get over the differences. Disk space isn't that expensive anymore and high speed isn't like when I was using dial-up! I'm logically flawed and stuck in the past...


Old thread alert!

So what, the poll and the question is still relevant??

« Reply #32 on: February 16, 2013, 18:28 »
+1
As already said, storage is cheap.

I always save a PSD, at original size, and to JPG at 12 - if I have to re-edit, I work from the PSD.  I never resave a JPG.

And if that's not feasible, I've still got the RAW.

Exactly how I work.  I try not to go back and edit a JPG, rather the PSD.  And where I really may have screwed the pooch, I will start with the original RAW file.

« Reply #33 on: February 16, 2013, 18:33 »
0
I had to change my answer.  I now save files at Q12.  not because I can see a difference but because there is no reason not to. 

w7lwi

  • Those that don't stand up to evil enable evil.
« Reply #34 on: February 16, 2013, 21:18 »
0
I had to change my answer.  I now save files at Q12.  not because I can see a difference but because there is no reason not to.

Agree completely.  I save my master images as TIFF files only because they appear as thumbnails while PSD files do not.  If any editing needs to be done, it is always on these.  The JPEG file that is to be submitted is always saved at quality level 12 because, as Leaf says, there's no reason not to.  Memory is dirt cheap.  I've a two terabyte HD in my computer along with multiple terabyte external drives for back-up.  And with high-speed internet, uploading is rarely an issue.  The only time I've had to resort to lower quality on my JPEG's is when the file size is too large to meet the agency's limit.  I had a JPEG file that I wanted to upload to Alamy, but it was around 75mb at quality level 12, even though it was only 5000 x 5000 pixels (very high color saturation).  Had to save it at level 10 to get it small enough to meet Alamy's maximum limit.

tab62

« Reply #35 on: February 16, 2013, 21:38 »
0
This survey really was a landslide in favor of 12 for sure! This 12 wins the election for another 4 years...

« Reply #36 on: February 16, 2013, 22:21 »
0
Yikes! Now I feel bad saving my illustrations JPGs at 11.


« Reply #37 on: February 18, 2013, 18:42 »
+1
Hi All,
 I save at 12 and I save the 100 mg. 16-bit psd as well. Here is a link that might be of some interest to everyone about the myths and truths of jpegs. http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/formatsjpeg/a/jpegmythsfacts.htm Hope this is of help.

Cheers,
Jonathan

Poncke

« Reply #38 on: February 18, 2013, 18:46 »
+1
Hi All,
 I save at 12 and I save the 100 mg. 16-bit psd as well. Here is a link that might be of some interest to everyone about the myths and truths of jpegs. http://graphicssoft.about.com/od/formatsjpeg/a/jpegmythsfacts.htm Hope this is of help.

Cheers,
Jonathan
Cheers Jonathan.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
6273 Views
Last post May 12, 2008, 13:03
by Whiz
15 Replies
9864 Views
Last post November 28, 2009, 11:30
by PeterChigmaroff
4 Replies
4902 Views
Last post January 03, 2010, 20:18
by icefront
1 Replies
16974 Views
Last post June 29, 2010, 05:40
by Amos Struck
8 Replies
6880 Views
Last post February 20, 2016, 05:19
by PatrickA1

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors