pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Using TIFF & Saving to JPEG  (Read 7463 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: November 28, 2006, 04:01 »
0
To achieve better quality would this be a good option.

You can work on the TIFF if needed without loss and then save.
Am I right about this?


« Reply #1 on: November 28, 2006, 04:39 »
0
that is right.

Save tiff with zip or lzw compression and it will be compressed without any loss of data.  then when you are ready to submit to a site, save as jpg.

eendicott

« Reply #2 on: November 28, 2006, 09:47 »
0
My normal workflow is to make all my changes in TIF, then when I'm ready to submit, I batch process the TIFF files through Neat Image and save them as a JPG in Neat Image.  The next step is upload to the site.  This ensures they get the best possible JPG I can offer.  Sometimes I have to make some minor changes to the filtered file but most of the time I don't.

« Reply #3 on: November 28, 2006, 14:34 »
0
Thanks very much for that.

« Reply #4 on: November 28, 2006, 17:58 »
0
Why not just PSD and JPEG?

« Reply #5 on: November 29, 2006, 02:43 »
0
i think tiff files, at least when compressed with zip or lzw are smaller than psd files.  Since nothing is lost in losseless tiff compression, why not tiff.

eendicott

« Reply #6 on: November 29, 2006, 10:10 »
0
I'm sure opinions will vary but my thoughts are that I want to be able to store and market my images over time.  A TIFF is timeless.  A JPG is timeless.  Both are widely accepted around the world and will not go away in the next 5 or 10 years.  PSD is specific to Photoshop.  I don't know if I'll be using Photoshop in the next 5 years - how many designers are still using Quark over Photoshop?

I also don't go from a PSD to a JPG because I want the very last thing I do to an image to get filtered for noise - thus I allow the noise filtration software to do the conversion.  I've also noticed that Neat Image will sometimes exploit errors that I didn't see in Photoshop so I'll have to go back in and re-adjust a couple of things on the TIFF, then re-process.

It's all in the process you like and your personal opinions  ;D

« Reply #7 on: November 29, 2006, 10:21 »
0
if you get the photoshop plug in for neat image you will save yourself oodles of time.  I don't use noiseninja, but the idea is the same.

Being able to use the software inside of photoshop is VERY handy, and very much worth the extra cost.

« Reply #8 on: November 29, 2006, 16:17 »
0
I want the very last thing I do to an image to get filtered for noise

Why do you do it this way? Everything I've read and heard indicates noise should be handled first.

eendicott

« Reply #9 on: November 29, 2006, 18:02 »
0
I disagree that noise should be handled first.  When you sharpen an image, you add to the noise.  When you increase saturation, you add to the noise.  When you lighten a dark image, you add to the noise.  If you lighten, sharpen, saturate, then remove noise, you don't have to worry about it every step of the way.  Additionally, every time you re-save a JPG, you re-compress that image and noise, artifacts will appear.  If that image is only compressed once before submitting, you won't have that issue.

suwanneeredhead

  • O.I.D. Sufferer (Obsessive Illustration Disorder)
« Reply #10 on: November 29, 2006, 22:54 »
0
My normal workflow is to make all my changes in TIF, then when I'm ready to submit, I batch process the TIFF files through Neat Image and save them as a JPG in Neat Image. 

Wow, you batch process with NeatImage? I find that applying NeatImage to an entire image really screws up the sharpness, i have to do it selectively in layers to only filter out noise in the parts of the image where there is noise! And each image needs different amounts of noise reduction! Wish list: D200 where I can shoot at ISO 100, my D70 only goes down to 200 (what were they thinking?).

But I do agree that noise needs to be handled last... unless the occasion arises where the noise reduction dulls down the sharpness in a spot or two and then I have to go in and sharpen that area last.  I agree, most operations on an image can increase noise, especially saturation.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2006, 22:56 by suwanneeredhead »

« Reply #11 on: November 30, 2006, 02:47 »
0
Sorry..but you DEFINATELY have it all wrong guys...
For best quality, you remove (selectively) and noise first. I auto profile (mostly) with Noise Ninja in PS...but you can also just change your image to Lab color in PS and apply some gaussian blur to the a and b channels...this gets rid of a lot of digital color noise. Any adjustments you are doing doesn't add 'noise', though it can accentuate any noise that is there (especially sharpening). By doing noise removal last, you are seriously degrading the accutance of the image and removing detail.
You may say it is just your 'preference', but there is stilla right way and a wrong way to do things (especially that photography at it's core is 'technical' in nature and therefore bound by certain 'technical' laws).
Definatley save in PSD...noway PS is going anywhere....A PSD is basically just a TIFF anyway, but is best when you have to work with others, and also to save all the layers and PS data as well.

Basic 101 workflow rules : (seelctive) noise removal, adjustments (ALWAYS use layer adjustments for Levels etc., as they do not change the actual image,but save the adjustments in a new layer), then save as PSD.
You should also create a new layer with the sharpened version of an image...but it always depends on what size you are outputting to.
After PSD save I crop, interploate to desired size (exporting to Photozoom 2) then save as tiff.
THEN open tiff and sharpen, save as tiff...then save as JPEG.

I have different folders (for print) for the different sizes....they all need to be sharpened individually for their size (after interpolating).
I have 1 MASTER PSD folder as well.

Hope that helps!

eendicott

« Reply #12 on: November 30, 2006, 10:56 »
0
Mr. Leonard - wrong and right are subjective when the question relates to the arts  ;D

you state: "you can also just change your image to Lab color in PS and apply some gaussian blur to the a and b channels...this gets rid of a lot of digital color noise. Any adjustments you are doing doesn't add 'noise', though it can accentuate any noise that is there (especially sharpening)"

So basically what you are doing is blurring the noise out with gaussian blur, then re-sharpening the blurred area by trying to sharpen the image?  Why are you making your life so difficult?

As I mentioned, it's all a matter of opinion - technically correct or not. I shoot in both RAW and JPG simultaneously.  If the JPG isn't good enough straight out of the camera, then any adjustments I make to an image as far as levels, lightness, sharpness, contrast, resizing, cropping, etc., etc. is done in RAW.  Very rarely do I do any adjustments to the image in PS unless I'm doing some cloning or healing brush work, replacing a background, isolating something, etc., etc.  I adjust in RAW, click OK, save as TIFF, save a thumbnail for my personal web site, then move on to Neat Image.  Again, it may not be "technically correct" in Photoshop, but there are those that argue that the image should be "technically correct" out of the camera  :)

For stuff to send to RM places that require TIFFs, or for images that will be saved later to be used in conjunction with other images, then I save as a TIFF through Neat Image.

There is a big difference between photography and design work which sometimes gets a little mixed up in the way stock has evolved.  If you are going to combine your images to make new ones (say overlay an isolated image of two hands shaking with a background of a corporate office building) then that is a completely different process - that is not photography, it's design (I'll get pounded on for those comments - no worries, I've got thick skin).  Because of my personal process (again, may not be technically correct) if I were to combine those two images in PS, then I wouldn't have to worry about much noise because of the way I process my images (the images have already been processed for noise prior to the creation of the "design").

Suwanneeredhead- I have a Canon 20d and a Canon 30d.  On the Neat Image homepage there are profiles for the 20d at different ISOs that do not sharpen the image when processed.  I really like that profile set and I can get away with batch processing the images on from the 20d - though I am sure to select the "fine tune" option when batch processing.  Hardly ever have problems with that profile set.

With the 30d, I'm still working on issues.  I've only had the camera about a month but the processing is a little different.  Most of the time, I get away with using the 20d profiles for the 30d and have no problems batch processing but sometimes I do have to go back and select an area and reprocess that way.


« Reply #13 on: December 06, 2006, 00:58 »
0
eendicott,
Combining multiple images in PS is photography...except when done with design elements...text or lines etc. I mostly do fine art photography...I just slum it in stock to get a few bucks for otherwise unusable images.I often combine multiple images in my work...but in no way ever concern myself with 'design', as the end is always for fine art...not commercial.

Using the a and b light channels in Lab are simply the red and green ( I may be wrong....but sure it is just 2 colors), where the color noise is most evident...it does not 'blur' the image/edges etc...simply the noise color.I personally selectively use Noise Ninja where I profile the image,remove noise, and then paint in the areas I want/neednoise removalwith the history brush.
If you dont believe me..or want other opinions...I am sure most all of the digital imaging top -notch pros will tell you Noise Removel first...Sharpen last.

Right and wrong are of course always 'subjective'...duh...but that is a not a very constructive or useful attitude to have I believe (sigh...subjectively). Simply put there are FACTS and SCIENCE with digital photography ( I wasn't talking about the creative or ART blah blah).

« Reply #14 on: December 06, 2006, 01:50 »
0

Basic 101 workflow rules : (seelctive) noise removal, adjustments (ALWAYS use layer adjustments for Levels etc., as they do not change the actual image,but save the adjustments in a new layer), then save as PSD.
You should also create a new layer with the sharpened version of an image...


Bit of a newbie question here ...

I understand that making adjustments in a different layer does not change the actual image. But then some agencies require that the images submitted have just one layer. So you have to combine the layers you've been working on ... and the image is changed, no?

So what's the advantage of working in layers?

« Reply #15 on: December 06, 2006, 04:10 »
0
Bit of a newbie question here ...

I understand that making adjustments in a different layer does not change the actual image. But then some agencies require that the images submitted have just one layer. So you have to combine the layers you've been working on ... and the image is changed, no?

So what's the advantage of working in layers?

You should always submit a flattened image to the agency. The advantages of layers are to you not to the end user. They allow you to revert or change edits at a future time in an easy and time efficient manner. Basically adding a great deal of flexibility in processing. Yes, the final product is different than the original. The original would be some sort of RAW format. The working copy would be your unsharpened, unflattened PSD with all its layers or your editor's equivalent. And then there would be the various final output images which have been edited and sharpened dependent on the size needed and how they are going to be output.

« Reply #16 on: December 06, 2006, 05:39 »
0
Bit of a newbie question here ...

I understand that making adjustments in a different layer does not change the actual image. But then some agencies require that the images submitted have just one layer. So you have to combine the layers you've been working on ... and the image is changed, no?

So what's the advantage of working in layers?

As a final step, you need to combine all of the layers in order to generate a JPG.  But this should be saved to a separate file (as well as all other edits).  So the original image should stay the same.  But the new JPG has changed from the original.

The advantage to using layers, is that you can also save the layered file (once again as a separate file).  This will allow you to go back and tweak the image or make additional changes.

« Reply #17 on: December 08, 2006, 14:22 »
0
Bit of a newbie question here ...

I understand that making adjustments in a different layer does not change the actual image. But then some agencies require that the images submitted have just one layer. So you have to combine the layers you've been working on ... and the image is changed, no?

So what's the advantage of working in layers?

As a final step, you need to combine all of the layers in order to generate a JPG.  But this should be saved to a separate file (as well as all other edits).  So the original image should stay the same.  But the new JPG has changed from the original.

The advantage to using layers, is that you can also save the layered file (once again as a separate file).  This will allow you to go back and tweak the image or make additional changes.


I like to add to GeoPappas statement by mentioning if your new to Photoshop that you can easily combine layers by only having the ones you want to show in the jpeg file set to visible. You accomplish this by selecting the layers in the "layers" window. When you do this a icon of a eye will appear beside those selected layers and images on those layers would become visible in your image window. To deselect layers you just click on a particular layer and the icon would then dissappear and what was on that layer will no longer show on your image screen. Layering also allows you to easily make variations of an image!


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2953 Views
Last post December 12, 2007, 20:04
by madelaide
6 Replies
9333 Views
Last post October 07, 2008, 16:44
by madelaide
9 Replies
3865 Views
Last post February 14, 2010, 15:19
by Klauts
1 Replies
4316 Views
Last post February 03, 2011, 15:12
by Morphart
1 Replies
3675 Views
Last post December 23, 2010, 14:13
by Fotonaut

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle