Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Editing tiff's. Any loss?

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
April 11, 2005 12:16:36 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and edit
a file
more than once?

More about : editing tiff loss

Anonymous
April 11, 2005 12:34:32 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:16:36 -0400, in rec.photo.digital Gerry
<gja1@pop.erols.com> wrote:

>Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and edit
>a file
>more than once?

There is no loss associated with editing any image starting from any file
type. Thee possible loss of information occurs when you save to a file
format that uses lossy compression.
----------
Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:17:51 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Gerry <gja1@pop.erols.com> wrote:

> Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and edit a
> file more than once?

TIFF is a lossless format. Anything you lose will occur during editing,
not saving.
Related resources
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:46:44 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ed Ruf <egruf_usenet@cox.net> writes:

> On Sun, 10 Apr 2005 20:16:36 -0400, in rec.photo.digital Gerry
> <gja1@pop.erols.com> wrote:
>
>>Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and edit
>>a file
>>more than once?
>
> There is no loss associated with editing any image starting from any file
> type. Thee possible loss of information occurs when you save to a file
> format that uses lossy compression.

Yep, that's exactly it.

And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
jpeg compression. It's not something any photo editor I know can
actually *do*; but at least in theory using a TIFF file doesn't
actually guarantee that you're using a lossless (including "no")
compression.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 5:06:45 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <4259C1E4.FCA8C5C9@pop.erols.com>,
Gerry <gja1@pop.erols.com> wrote:

>Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and edit
>a file
>more than once?

8-bit TIFF is only a little better than JPEG. 16-bit TIFF is much
better (but still not perfect).
--

<>>< ><<> ><<> <>>< ><<> <>>< <>>< ><<>
John P Sheehy <JPS@no.komm>
><<> <>>< <>>< ><<> <>>< ><<> ><<> <>><
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 5:12:03 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

JPS@no.komm wrote:
> In message <4259C1E4.FCA8C5C9@pop.erols.com>,
> Gerry <gja1@pop.erols.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and edit
>>a file
>>more than once?
>
>
> 8-bit TIFF is only a little better than JPEG. 16-bit TIFF is much
> better (but still not perfect).
Tiff is a lossless (and often not compressed) format. It is not subject
to compression artifacts. One the other hand, it takes much more memory
space to store (and longer to write) than a .jpg file of the same scene.
It is a good intermediate format for multiple editing/save/edit steps.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 6:03:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Paul Mitchum wrote:
> Gerry <gja1@pop.erols.com> wrote:
>
>> Is there any loss involved in editing a tiff file? Can you open and
>> edit a file more than once?
>
> TIFF is a lossless format. Anything you lose will occur during
> editing, not saving.

But those losses will be saved losslessly! ;^)
April 11, 2005 7:18:39 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Tiff itself is lossless.
If you alter the image in a photo editing program and save in tiff those
changes are irreversible.
Photoshop (and other programs) allows changes to be made to your image in
layers that do not affect the underlying image. In Photoshop the file has to
be saved in the PSD photoshop proprietary format, which is also lossless. If
you have not made any alterations to the base layer it remains in pristine
lossless condition.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 7:18:40 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

birdman wrote:
> Tiff itself is lossless.
> If you alter the image in a photo editing program and save in tiff those
> changes are irreversible.
> Photoshop (and other programs) allows changes to be made to your image in
> layers that do not affect the underlying image. In Photoshop the file has to
> be saved in the PSD photoshop proprietary format, which is also lossless. If
> you have not made any alterations to the base layer it remains in pristine
> lossless condition.
>
>
I don't have Photoshop (just Photoshop Elements), but I strongly doubt
that Photoshop will ONLY save in PSD format. If so, I wouldn't want it.
The default format in PSE is PSD, but it will save in many different
formats, depending on what the user wants to do with the image.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 11:17:04 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
: birdman wrote:
: > Tiff itself is lossless.
: > If you alter the image in a photo editing program and save in tiff
: > those changes are irreversible.
: > Photoshop (and other programs) allows changes to be made to your
: > image in layers that do not affect the underlying image. In Photoshop
: > the file has to be saved in the PSD photoshop proprietary format,
: > which is also lossless. If you have not made any alterations to the
: > base layer it remains in pristine lossless condition.
: >
: I don't have Photoshop (just Photoshop Elements), but I strongly doubt
: that Photoshop will ONLY save in PSD format. If so, I wouldn't want it.
: The default format in PSE is PSD, but it will save in many different
: formats, depending on what the user wants to do with the image.

I think what he was referring to was that a multiple layer image can only
be saved in PSD. But if you flatten the image first you can save in a very
long list of formats.

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 11:17:05 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Randy Berbaum wrote:
> Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
> : birdman wrote:
> : > Tiff itself is lossless.
> : > If you alter the image in a photo editing program and save in tiff
> : > those changes are irreversible.
> : > Photoshop (and other programs) allows changes to be made to your
> : > image in layers that do not affect the underlying image. In Photoshop
> : > the file has to be saved in the PSD photoshop proprietary format,
> : > which is also lossless. If you have not made any alterations to the
> : > base layer it remains in pristine lossless condition.
> : >
> : I don't have Photoshop (just Photoshop Elements), but I strongly doubt
> : that Photoshop will ONLY save in PSD format. If so, I wouldn't want it.
> : The default format in PSE is PSD, but it will save in many different
> : formats, depending on what the user wants to do with the image.
>
> I think what he was referring to was that a multiple layer image can only
> be saved in PSD. But if you flatten the image first you can save in a very
> long list of formats.
>
> Randy
>
> ==========
> Randy Berbaum
> Champaign, IL
>
PSD is certainly the format of choice for any sustained editing cycles,
but there is little benefit of maintaining that format after all editing
is done. I suppose a really dedicated person would save the original
(RAW?) file, and the last PSD edit, and work with a compressed .TIFF, or
even a .jpg file. Certainly no one with a dialup connection would
appreciate getting a PSD file in his email.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:28:08 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

>>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>>jpeg compression.

Yep. Most folks don't realise that TIFF is not a compression or data format
standard and does not imply one. It is simply a file structure. Within
that structure you can store data in pretty much any format you please,
compressed or otherwise.

Most photo software uses the TIFF framework, and a .tiff file type, for
storing uncompressed images. For this reason, TIFF has become synonymous in
many users minds with uncompressed photo format. Most of the time that's
true so I've given up correcting this misapprehension.

Keith
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:30:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <m23btxyl6z.fsf@gw.dd-b.net>,
David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> wrote:
>
>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>jpeg compression. It's not something any photo editor I know can
>actually *do*;

Photoshop can save JPEG-encoded TIFFs.
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:45:06 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:

: PSD is certainly the format of choice for any sustained editing cycles,
: but there is little benefit of maintaining that format after all editing
: is done. I suppose a really dedicated person would save the original
: (RAW?) file, and the last PSD edit, and work with a compressed .TIFF, or
: even a .jpg file. Certainly no one with a dialup connection would
: appreciate getting a PSD file in his email.

I agree. A saved original (in whatever format that was originally saved),
one or more mid-process edit "security" saves in PSD, and a finished
product saved in your favorite storage format (tiff, jpg, etc) makes
sense. Once the edit is complete and enough time has passed that you can
be sure that no further edit work is required, the edit files (psd) can be
discarded for long term storage.

I always store my photos directly from the memory card to a CD for
permanent storage of the originals. Then any images I desire to do editing
on are copied to the HD for work. Then intermediate saves also go to the
same folder on the HD. The final product is then saved to a CD for long
term storage. Once I am sure that no further editing is desirable I can
delete the project folder with all the unneeded PSD files. Depending on
the project (and how much editing I did) this deleting could be
immediately upon saving finished product, or in 6 months for some of the
more involved edits that I may decide to do a bit more tweeking on. :) 

Randy

==========
Randy Berbaum
Champaign, IL
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 1:58:00 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Keith Sheppard wrote:
>>>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>>>jpeg compression.
>
>
> Yep. Most folks don't realise that TIFF is not a compression or data format
> standard and does not imply one. It is simply a file structure. Within
> that structure you can store data in pretty much any format you please,
> compressed or otherwise.
>
> Most photo software uses the TIFF framework, and a .tiff file type, for
> storing uncompressed images. For this reason, TIFF has become synonymous in
> many users minds with uncompressed photo format. Most of the time that's
> true so I've given up correcting this misapprehension.
>
> Keith
>
>
Saving a tiff format file compressed with JPEG compression is possible,
but the result would be a file with .jpg extension so that it could be
decoded back to some thing resembling the original file. Somehow I
doubt this would be a satisfactory experience.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:02:43 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Keith Sheppard" <keith.sheppard@tesco.net> writes:

>>>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>>>jpeg compression.
>
> Yep. Most folks don't realise that TIFF is not a compression or
> data format standard and does not imply one. It is simply a file
> structure. Within that structure you can store data in pretty much
> any format you please, compressed or otherwise.
>
> Most photo software uses the TIFF framework, and a .tiff file type,
> for storing uncompressed images. For this reason, TIFF has become
> synonymous in many users minds with uncompressed photo format. Most
> of the time that's true so I've given up correcting this
> misapprehension.

And that may be the right choice; my pedantry may just confuse
people.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:03:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> writes:

> Keith Sheppard wrote:
>>>>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>>>>jpeg compression.
>> Yep. Most folks don't realise that TIFF is not a compression or
>> data format
>> standard and does not imply one. It is simply a file structure. Within
>> that structure you can store data in pretty much any format you please,
>> compressed or otherwise.
>> Most photo software uses the TIFF framework, and a .tiff file type,
>> for
>> storing uncompressed images. For this reason, TIFF has become synonymous in
>> many users minds with uncompressed photo format. Most of the time that's
>> true so I've given up correcting this misapprehension.
>> Keith
>>
> Saving a tiff format file compressed with JPEG compression is
> possible, but the result would be a file with .jpg extension so that
> it could be decoded back to some thing resembling the original file.
> Somehow I doubt this would be a satisfactory experience.

Seems to me that's a question of how some particular piece of software
works, rather than an broader kind of fact. What particular piece of
software did you have in mind that exhibits that behavior?
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 3:04:55 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Chris Brown <cpbrown@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> writes:

> In article <m23btxyl6z.fsf@gw.dd-b.net>,
> David Dyer-Bennet <dd-b@dd-b.net> wrote:
>>
>>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>>jpeg compression. It's not something any photo editor I know can
>>actually *do*;
>
> Photoshop can save JPEG-encoded TIFFs.

Oh, you're quite right. I thought it could, then I started thinking
it couldn't, but now that you say it, I remember the exact dialog box
where I could specify that if I wanted to.

I've found enough other software that won't even read LZW compressed
TIFFs that I mostly save them uncompressed.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, <mailto:D d-b@dd-b.net>, <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/&gt;
RKBA: <http://noguns-nomoney.com/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/carry/&gt;
Pics: <http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/&gt; <http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/&gt;
Dragaera/Steven Brust: <http://dragaera.info/&gt;
Anonymous
April 11, 2005 7:23:03 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
> Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> writes:
>
>
>>Keith Sheppard wrote:
>>
>>>>>And, incidentally, TIFF does support the possibility of using lossy
>>>>>jpeg compression.
>>>
>>>Yep. Most folks don't realise that TIFF is not a compression or
>>>data format
>>>standard and does not imply one. It is simply a file structure. Within
>>>that structure you can store data in pretty much any format you please,
>>>compressed or otherwise.
>>>Most photo software uses the TIFF framework, and a .tiff file type,
>>>for
>>>storing uncompressed images. For this reason, TIFF has become synonymous in
>>>many users minds with uncompressed photo format. Most of the time that's
>>>true so I've given up correcting this misapprehension.
>>>Keith
>>>
>>
>>Saving a tiff format file compressed with JPEG compression is
>>possible, but the result would be a file with .jpg extension so that
>>it could be decoded back to some thing resembling the original file.
>>Somehow I doubt this would be a satisfactory experience.
>
>
> Seems to me that's a question of how some particular piece of software
> works, rather than an broader kind of fact. What particular piece of
> software did you have in mind that exhibits that behavior?
None. I meant to explain that the combination is of no practical value,
and probably wouldn't give good results. It's a badly matched pair, at
best.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net
Anonymous
April 13, 2005 2:28:50 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

If you use lossy compression you would no doubt lous information.
>
> There is no loss associated with editing any image starting from any file
> type. Thee possible loss of information occurs when you save to a file
> format that uses lossy compression.
> ----------
> Ed Ruf Lifetime AMA# 344007 (Usenet@EdwardG.Ruf.com)
> See images taken with my CP-990/5700 & D70 at
> http://edwardgruf.com/Digital_Photography/General/index...
!