Simple question - when we can scan photos into either file format, why go for one rather than the other? And this applies to photo scanning, slide scanning in 35mm and medium format.
Let’s get rid of one of the “old wives tales” of photo scanning, that saving a file as a jpg ruins its quality. Well that may or may not have been true a few years ago but I don’t think anyone seriously worries about that now.
The main benefit of jpg files is that they are very much smaller. That can make a very big difference in the time it takes to open or edit a photo. Bigger files rapidly eat up CDs, DVDs or hard drives. Even with a powerful modern PC manipulating a TIFF image from, say a medium format negative, can be a significant task. Maybe OK if you’re just editing one image but suppose we scan 100 or more?
For the vast majority of not only our clients but scanning service users and photographers in general I’d say jpg is more than adequate. If you plan to do heavy editing and you have access to lots of computing horse power TIFF may be the option.
No comments:
Post a Comment