If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Q-Confused about which picture record mode to use in a digital camera.
Hi:
I have an Olympus C-50. In the past, with my D-40, I had always chosen the SHQ (low compression) mode. But I've often wondered if I should be shooting under TIFF (uncompressed) mode to obtain the highest quality shoot for future printing and retouching. I've never considered shooting under any of the other modes offered (HQ, SQ1, SQ2). So my questions a 1) Is there really any noticeable difference between TIFF and SHQ mode? 2) Any reason to be shooting under one mode vs the other? Thanks It's Mr. Rather B. Beachen to you |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Q-Confused about which picture record mode to use in a digital camera.
On Sun, 11 Jul 2004 06:02:51 -0700, Mr. Rather B. Beachen
wrote: Hi: I have an Olympus C-50. In the past, with my D-40, I had always chosen the SHQ (low compression) mode. But I've often wondered if I should be shooting under TIFF (uncompressed) mode to obtain the highest quality shoot for future printing and retouching. I've never considered shooting under any of the other modes offered (HQ, SQ1, SQ2). So my questions a 1) Is there really any noticeable difference between TIFF and SHQ mode? You should make some tests to see for yourself. What I did on my last camera was to take pictures at each quality setting and compare them at high magnification on the computer. What I was looking for was what I call 'jaypegging' which is my term for the distortion caused by the JPEG conversion process. This distortion shows up as little squares of color inside bigger squares, as opposed to the original TIFF image that has only pixels. I compare each JPEG image to the TIFF which is the best quality So you select the same area in each image, and blow them up so that you can see individual color squares in the TIFF image. Now look at the JPEG image and see how close they are in appearance. As you decrease the JPEG quality, the color squares will be blended into bigger squares, eventually destroying all of the detail if you go to far. Luckily no camera settings go too far! I found on my last camera that the fine jpg was very very close to the TIF image, and in only a few places could I find blended pixels. The regular jpg did have lots of blended areas, but they weren't a problem at lower magnification, so a lot depends on what you do with the final picture. I decided to not use the TIF because it gave no advantage, and wasted lots of space! One other thing - I found that even though the file size for a 'medium size + fine jpeg' was the same as a 'full size + norm jpeg' , as far as quality of picture went, the large size beat the small by a wide margin. When you increase the small pic to compensate, you merely double the pixels, so the larger picture is better to begin with, and less quality jaypegging may not mess it up as much. I still have to make some comparisons on my new camera, but in it's case I also have dynamic range to worry about, since jpegs are 24 bit and the camera is 32. I think... |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Will digital photography ever stabilize? | Alfred Molon | Digital Photography | 37 | June 30th 04 08:11 PM |
Digital Imaging vs. (Digital and Film) Photography | Bob Monaghan | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 9 | June 19th 04 05:48 PM |
What was wrong with film? | George | Medium Format Photography Equipment | 192 | March 4th 04 03:44 PM |
Which is better? digital cameras or older crappy cameras thatuse film? | Michael Weinstein, M.D. | In The Darkroom | 13 | January 24th 04 10:51 PM |