Final raw file conversion

[buleetu]

hi everyone

when i am finished making adjustments to my raw files on raw therapee what should i be finalising them too tiff jpeg etc...

i read that jpegs are compressed and we lose detail when finalise them from a raw

i also read that tiffs are the best file to use because there is no compression and the file is still exactly the same as before we save it from the raw

is it true

 

[ScubaGil]

It really depends on what the final purpose of the pics is. Is this just for web viewing, publishing, emailing, printing?

 

[Papa_Bear]

Archive and print in TIFF and Jpeg for web only!

 

[PlanetMarz]

I personally archive the original raw images on one hard drive and convert them via droplet to .dng to another hard drive for extra redundancy.
Papa Bear is right on the money, jpg for web (don't forget to convert to SRGB) and tiff for prints.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

Papa Bear is right on the money, jpg for web (don't forget to convert to SRGB) and tiff for prints.

There are plenty of serious photographers who print with jpg files, many even shoot in jpg. When I first started selling my prints, I thought the best product would be with the largest file size. After discussions on other boards and with more experienced printers I tried jpg. The results were better in many ways and I now see no advantage in printing tiff.

Slower print times, possibly wasted ink and huge storage medium = printing with tiff. I have the original raw, a converted and photoshop'ed tiff (or psd), a low quality 500x375 pix jpg for web and high quality jpg's for each printing size (up to 12"x18").

My customers have never questioned the file type!

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

If you are working with PH7 you could save as a full res tif or psd; tif can be compressed and psd can save more data. Then you could resize and save a web/email version, as well as resizing and saving some print versions if you are going to have any prints made.

With regard to printing:

Not sure the image aspect ratio for your camera; mine is 7.5 x 10, so for typical prints (4"x6", 5"x7", 6"x9", 8"x10", 8"x12", 11"x14" and 12"x18") there will be cropping before the printing happens.

If you do not decide the crop, the photo lab decides. Depending on the lab, it might just be centered, or sometimes slightly zoomed. With film, I often had shark tails cropped out because the lab people would not take the time to get to one edge of the image. Now the exact file I send is completely printed.

with 4x6, 6x9, 8x12, and 12x18, the aspect ratio is the same so you might think you could just have one 2x3 file for all four prints. Each print is viewed from a different distance so the required ink drops per inch are not the same. 4x6 is hand held and close, so 300 dpi is usually recommended. As the size of the print increases, the viewing distance also increases so the dpi can decrease without perceptible effect. A 12x18 is just fine at 180 dpi (much quicker printing and much less ink waste).

Sharpening is also an issue; with un-sharp mask in PS a big tool. The effects to the large print files is hard to see on the computer screen compared to the web images. Print files can benefit from higher un-sharp values, but test prints may be required to figure out how much is optimum for each size. I have only been using 2 main un-sharps; one web and one print. I have occasionally cranked up un-sharp for 11x14 and 12x18, but did not really notice the difference.

I have been selling my images for 5 years using only PS Elements. At the start it was E2 and I had to convert the raw image to tif with Camedia Master (Oly software). Now with E4 I convert in Bridge. Planning on upgrading to E6 soon.

This is kind of dinosaur compared to the CS3/Lightroom crowd, but it works for me. I am looking at options to speed up the workflow; batch processing is the main advantage to the more expensive software IMHO.

 

[alcina]

I convert my RAWs to DNG, save as PSD files. Jpegs with sRGB for printing and web work. Check with your lab of choice for their directions. I use Lightroom and PSCS3. I have never dealt with TIFFs.

 

[PlanetMarz]

There are plenty of serious photographers who print with jpg files, many even shoot in jpg. When I first started selling my prints, I thought the best product would be with the largest file size. After discussions on other boards and with more experienced printers I tried jpg. The results were better in many ways and I now see no advantage in printing tiff.

Slower print times, possibly wasted ink and huge storage medium = printing with tiff. I have the original raw, a converted and photoshop'ed tiff (or psd), a low quality 500x375 pix jpg for web and high quality jpg's for each printing size (up to 12"x18").

My customers have never questioned the file type!

I have seen Pro photographers using disposable cameras, but I wouldn't recommend it. I'm no pixel-peeper, but I do all of my own printing and at the larger sizes every pixel counts.

I think the point here is that jpg = lossy compression which is bad for archiving and print jobs.

 

[MauiScubaSteve]

I have seen Pro photographers using disposable cameras, but I wouldn't recommend it. I'm no pixel-peeper, but I do all of my own printing and at the larger sizes every pixel counts.

I think the point here is that jpg = lossy compression which is bad for archiving and print jobs.

I print nothing larger than 12"x18", but have a friend that prints up to 40"x60". He has sold numerous canvas prints of images shot in jpg with a Canon S60.

There are a large number of pretty good cameras that do not shot in raw, so the original file (jpg) would be the best to archive, right?

As far as pixels go; what is the difference in pixel count between a jpg that is 12x18 @ 200 dpi and a tif that is 12x18 @ 200 dpi?

For the record; I shoot exclusively in raw, and I archive both the original raw image and a "final" tif (occasionally psd). I have compared tif prints to jpg prints, on both my own Canon S-9000 printer and the local Costco's printers, and I like the look of the jpg prints better.

I think the point here is jpg is not an archive format if you have raw originals. Depending of software used, tif or psd is best. For me the final conversion is not the archive conversion. Jpg print files require less storage, print faster and look better in the test prints I have made. If you don't do any tests you are left with a belief!

 

[RonFrank]

I save my RAW conversions as a PSD.

I convert them to other formats as needed. I also have the original fine JPG which is handy for viewing, and to put on the web if I so desire.

I always leave my originals alone.