I read the other day that it's only 12 percent of the UK that's built over
People assume it's more because they never go and look at the untouched 88 per cent
Ian if you don't have a option other than JPEG the best to save the original JPEGS somewhere and only work on copies. You can open them up OK it's only when you resave they lose a bit.
For anyone who wants to know, the format was developed as I mention by a group of photographers desperate to get the size down for sending online yet still retain high quality and JPEGs are high quality of compressed files. The name of the group, committee was the Joint Photographic Experts Group...hence the name
Garry
"In the world of virtual reality things are not always what they seem."
Garry Russell wrote:Ian if you don't have a option other than JPEG the best to save the original JPEGS somewhere and only work on copies.
I'm OK, Garry. I can use RAW. I was talking about the majority of basic compact cameras. But that's very good advice about making a working copy of jpegs.
Not to complicate things, there is the TIFF file format you can use.
When I had my D30 Canon (Canon's first DSLR)I saved a copy of the RAW in TIFF. There is no loss in quality and it has benefits such as saving layers, transparencies etc so you can edit them later. Also, if you want to print an image it's what's recomended by the professionals I learnt from. It will however be a much larger file size than the RAW.
Yes, thanks, Joe. I've got all my old wildlife photos saved in tiff format as they are irreplaceable. I don't really have much time for photography as a hobby now so I just take snapshots. I don't really save my pictures although I expect there are a few dotted about on hard drives and disks somewhere!
Perhaps when I retire I'll buy a decent SLR and take it up again. If I do I'll be sure to save the best ones as tiffs
