From: James Dugger <
james.dugger@gmail.com>
> GIF and PNG are as others have mentioned more for internet uses where 256
> colors or web corrected colors are adequate.
PNG is capable of storing 8 bits/channel and 4 channels, giving it a much
larger than 256-color palette.
> That said a best practice is always to shoot in raw. Raw saves all of the
> shot information (EXIF data) in the image for further manipulation later.
> If you shoot in jpeg this info not available to you.
Er... the relatively cheap digicam I bought in 2002 saved date/time, effective
f-stop, shutter speed, effective ISO, and various other things in an EXIF
block within the JPEGs it produced. The slightly better digicam I have now
does the same thing, and it can't produce anything but JPEGs. Did you mean
"raw format has no JPEG artifacts and can have more than 8 bits per channel"?
Because that's true, and can have advantages if you're doing a lot of editing
in post. Especially if you're shooting where the lighting is
terrible/inconsistent.
> I would consider the shooting and storing of images in raw the
> equivalent to [negatives in glass].
This is also true. It just depends on how much disk space you'd like to
devote to storing stuff. Since I'm not a professional photographer, I find
that 3500x2600 JPEGs at 90+ quality (about 2.2M per JPEG) seem to work great
for what I need.
> If you need a lossless compressible file format save a copy as a
> TIFF.
Or PNG.
--
Matt G / Dances With Crows
The Crow202 Blog:
http://crow202.org/wordpress/
There is no Darkness in Eternity/But only Light too dim for us to see
---------------------------------------------------
PLUG-discuss mailing list -
PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or to change your mail settings:
http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss
%20in%20the%20image%20for%20further%20manipulation%20later.%0A>%20>%20If%20you%20shoot%20in%20jpeg%20this%20info%20not%20available%20to%20you.%0A>%20%0A>%20Er...%20the%20relatively%20cheap%20digicam%20I%20bought%20in%202002%20saved%20date/time,%20effective%0A>%20f-stop,%20shutter%20speed,%20effective%20ISO,%20and%20various%20other%20things%20in%20an%20EXIF%0A>%20block%20within%20the%20JPEGs%20it%20produced.%20%20The%20slightly%20better%20digicam%20I%20have%20now%0A>%20does%20the%20same%20thing,%20and%20it%20can't%20produce%20anything%20but%20JPEGs.%20%20Did%20you%20mean%0A>%20%22raw%20format%20has%20no%20JPEG%20artifacts%20and%20can%20have%20more%20than%208%20bits%20per%20channel%22?%20%0A>%20Because%20that's%20true,%20and%20can%20have%20advantages%20if%20you're%20doing%20a%20lot%20of%20editing%0A>%20in%20post.%20%20Especially%20if%20you're%20shooting%20where%20the%20lighting%20is%0A>%20terrible/inconsistent.%0A>%20%0A>%20>%20I%20would%20consider%20the%20shooting%20and%20storing%20of%20images%20in%20raw%20the%0A>%20>%20equivalent%20to%20%5Bnegatives%20in%20glass%5D.%0A>%20%0A>%20This%20is%20also%20true.%20%20It%20just%20depends%20on%20how%20much%20disk%20space%20you'd%20like%20to%0A>%20devote%20to%20storing%20stuff.%20%20Since%20I'm%20not%20a%20professional%20photographer,%20I%20find%0A>%20that%203500x2600%20JPEGs%20at%2090+%20quality%20(about%202.2M%20per%20JPEG)%20seem%20to%20work%20great%0A>%20for%20what%20I%20need.%0A>%20%0A>%20>%20If%20you%20need%20a%20lossless%20compressible%20file%20format%20save%20a%20copy%20as%20a%0A>%20>%20TIFF.%0A>%20%0A>%20Or%20PNG.%20%20%0A>%20%0A>%20--%20%0A>%20Matt%20G%20/%20Dances%20With%20Crows%0A>%20The%20Crow202%20Blog:%20%20http://crow202.org/wordpress/%0A>%20There%20is%20no%20Darkness%20in%20Eternity/But%20only%20Light%20too%20dim%20for%20us%20to%20see%0A>%20%0A>%20---------------------------------------------------%0A>%20PLUG-discuss%20mailing%20list%20-%20PLUG-discuss@lists.plug.phoenix.az.us%0A>%20To%20subscribe,%20unsubscribe,%20or%20to%20change%20your%20mail%20settings:%0A>%20http://lists.PLUG.phoenix.az.us/mailman/listinfo/plug-discuss%0A>%20%0A>%20 "Reply to this message")
(text/plain)