question about jpeg vs tiff vs raw

[m wike]

OK...I'm trying to figure out the RAW vs JPEG and JPEG vs TIFF
Will the quality of a pic be better if it's shot in RAW and then converted to Tiff rather than JPEG.
and....if you shoot in RAW and then convert to JPEG or TIFF and then edit the picture as a jpeg or tiff, will the outcome be better than an image shot in jpeg and then edited and saved a jpeg.
I'm so confused on this whole subject. I did my own little test and didn't see much difference. Except of course the difference in file size. Maybe that's the difference I should see....???>>>>

[OsmosisStudios]

TIFF files retain a higher bit-count than JPG, so they'll have smoother gradients then the same photo saved as a jpg: its subtle, but it's there. Anything important for printing gets saved as a TIFF.

I always shoot RAW because it gives me the most lateral control once I get the photo back into the studio for processing. Its just that much more fine tuning that I dont let the camera do.

[spazoid1965]

JPG/JPEG is a compressed file format. It is designed to be a file which will load faster over the internet. Every time you save or edit a jpeg file you will lose quality and file size. Try this experiment: Open a jpg file. Change one pixel and save the file. You'll notice the difference in file size. Do this several times then zoom in on the image in a large area with the same color.You will see a definenate chang in quality. Becuase the jpg file is compressing these areas.

[dcclark]

Originally Posted by m wike

OK...I'm trying to figure out the RAW vs JPEG and JPEG vs TIFF
Will the quality of a pic be better if it's shot in RAW and then converted to Tiff rather than JPEG.
and....if you shoot in RAW and then convert to JPEG or TIFF and then edit the picture as a jpeg or tiff, will the outcome be better than an image shot in jpeg and then edited and saved a jpeg.
I'm so confused on this whole subject. I did my own little test and didn't see much difference. Except of course the difference in file size. Maybe that's the difference I should see....???>>>>

jpeg files are compressed, however, you can control the level of compression. More compression means that you may start to notice "artifacts" (clearly artificial or incorrect information, like bands of color in the sky). However, at normal levels (90% quality, for example), they are essentially invisible. I have never noticed jpeg artifacts in my images at those quality levels.

Tiff files may or may not be compressed, but typically are much larger. In my mind, there is not enough of an advantage to save things in tiff format.

Honestly, if you can't see a difference, then you can't see a difference -- it's an image after all, so if you can't see it, it's not there!

[xxpinballxx]

Im a RAW shooter only cause I do alot of photoshop work.....I am almost too reliant on PS and don't really care about the shot cause I can make it what i want in Photoshop! LOL!
I think RAW is beneficial if you ar going to be doing some editting but if you are more in the mindset of getting the best shot right out of the camera then no reason to mess with RAW. I first thought RAW was the only way to go but if you let the camera do a bit of work for you then you are halfway there.
I assume you have read the differences in the two....(RAW and JPEG) As for tiff.....I am not 100% sure on the proper way to work with it.....I know if you are printing you'd rather have a tiff file than any other. I say if you can get to where you are doing minimal editing than go with JPEG save to tiff for printing. If you are planning on messing with them much use RAW that way you have every single bit of data the sensor caught to play with. When you shoot JPEG your camera is doing some of the work for you by taking a giving range of pixels and calculating the differences in color and then deleting the ones the human eye is not really going to be able to distinguish. Hence the smaller file size.

Now after writting this I know ther will be all kinds of other opinions.....I'm just giving mine.
Hope it helped a little bit.....

[sk66]

Originally Posted by m wike

I did my own little test and didn't see much difference. Except of course the difference in file size. Maybe that's the difference I should see....???>>>>

This may be the key point in your post....you don't see a difference, which means it may be of little/no benefit for you to shoot raw.

IMO, if you tend to work SOOC and do minimal post work, a Jpeg is fine/better...In fact, sometimes working in raw ADDS work just to get the image to the basic Jpeg image...

That said, I work with RAW.