I keep all my original files as DNG files; my "keepers" I open in Photoshop, make adjustments, and keep as PSD files; those that I print I sharpen and format for the print size and keep as PSD files also. Occasionally I send out files to print as JPGs. Is there any reason for me to use TIFF files? Other than being a universal format that is more compatible with other programs, is there any advantage to TIFF files over PSD files if you are just working in Photoshop and Lightroom? Thanks.
Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!
No special need for you. But at least you can create .tif files on an as needed basis from either .dng or .psd. The benefit is that you have compact file formats (compared with .tif) with full image information.
Occasionally I send out files to print as JPGs.
This might be an issue. If you are dealing with commercial offset printing, .tif format images are non-lossy, widely accepted and generally preferred; .jpg files are by nature lossy, although artifacts are generally not visible at highest-quality .jpg settings. And each open–>save–>close–>open cycle creates additional artifacts. But .jpg files are probably preferable for casual, non-critical sharing with friends and family, and their smaller file sizes make them easier to transmit.
* TIF is a more ubiquitous format, so more rograms can read the file. * If you save as TIF with LZW compression the files are smaller than PSD * If you have mose images with layers and some without, save the unlayered files as TIF. That way just a glance at the file name will give a rough idea of the image’s complexity.
I notice no significant difference when working on a local directory. I don’t use layered TIF files, so I did not try that, just non-layerred TIF and non-layered PSD.
It has been covered quite well. I recommend (not considering your DNG files) to use PSD for layered files (stay away from layered TIF files).
For flattened files that you send out or archive use TIF, and use LZW compression (it’s lossless) if you want to save space (about half, but varies greatly).
If you need to save more space, then use JPG at max quality (use "optimized" if possible, but no need for "progressive"). JPG will loose some image quality, but saving only once to JPG at max setting will not leave visible artifacts.
A test i did recently showed that opening and saving a JPG a couple of times at max gave no visible difference, but after 10 times i had artifacts in smooth areas that were visible on print… But as a file being sent to print it’s fine (as you only do it once and won’t see any difference).
Jonas was careful to specify ‘saving only once’, ‘only do it once’ and ‘if you need to save more space’ – – so claiming his advice to be reckless is, well, reckless. 🙂
Buy more space? Okay, let’s also scan all our images at 4800 ppi. Instead of buying DVDs, let’s ask the studios to give us uncompressed video to store on our massive hard drives. Let’s petition Adobe to remove JPG compression as an option in PDF files. Let’s ban stock photo agencies that offer JPG files.
🙂
Ignoring the possible benefits of any given format is silly.
The discussion of JPEG by the OP was in regard to sending out some files for print. The OP is clearly archiving DNG already.
The second part of the OP’s posting, and the way in which the thread then developed, indicated broader issues.
Occasionally I send out files to print as JPGs. Is there any reason for me to use TIFF files?
The printer might find that he does need to re-open your files and then re-save them to make them more suitable for his press conditions so submitting RGB JPEGs when a CMYK file is needed for output is not a good idea. Consider using Photoshop PDFs for that purpose.
Other than being a universal format that is more compatible with other programs, is there any advantage to TIFF files over PSD files if you are just working in Photoshop and Lightroom?
No mention of JPEGs in that part of his question and the possible advantages of using Tiffs because of their openability in ACR has already been mentioned.
let’s also scan all our images at 4800 ppi. .
Some of us do! Not everyone produces images solely for Web output or is involved with video and the OP appears to be primarily concerned with Press output.
Disk space is cheap If you need to compress save as Tiff with ZIP. PSD also has its own compression. The only time I would save Jpeg as an archive image is if I had shot a Jpeg with my camera then it will be saved untouched only to be used as a copy and resaved as a PSD or Tiff.
I think Ann summed up exactly how I feel about all the points Jim tried to make.
I don’t get the impression that you have too much experience with Press work but as you have never posted links to anything that you have created using Adobe software in these Forums, it is hard to know exactly how much real world experience you actually have and how much of what you post is just regurgitated from something that you have read?
Buko, how do you claim what ‘most of us use’ when you represent only yourself? Most use the default settings in Photoshop because they are unaware there is a difference, just as Ann did not realize that the PDF default was with JPG compression – – so anyone following Ann’s advice should be very careful that they are actually following her advice.
so anyone following Ann’s advice should be very careful that they
actually understand the program, the requirements for final output and that they take the trouble to read and set their preferences in ALL parts of the PDF set-up before attempting to use it.
So how much REAL experience of the Graphic Arts industry do you have Jim apart from reading Manuals and Tech. Sheets and doing IT maintenance?
I can’t be the only person who would be intrigued to see some examples of the highly talented work that you lead us to believe that you create?
So how much REAL experience of the Graphic Arts industry do you have Jim apart from reading Manuals and Tech. Sheets and doing IT maintenance?
OMG – I’m being insulted for being literate and keeping up with the times. Ann must be a die-hard Sarah Palin supporter. 🙂
Buko, post #17 should have preceded or accompanied post #12. I apologize for being like everyone else and not being able to read Ann’s mind to know how she would clarify her recommendation in post #12.
The argument is solely within Ann’s head, yet again. She is the one that recommended a format that defaults to JPG compression, while arguing JPG compression. I just pointed out the discrepancy to be helpful to others that cannot read her mind either. 🙂
Ann, I don’t think Neil is going to fall for your ‘no insult was …intended’ comment and take any pity on you. The type of file format one saves to has nothing to do with anyone’s experience in the graphics industry. Your question of my experience is a red herring and only meant to attack another who tries to clarify your sweeping generalizations. Any recent design graduate could have recognized that the default PDF output from Photoshop is JPG compressed. Whatever I post here does not need to be backed up with my reputation. Just look at the software, read the manual or other documentation, test it yourself and then determine what is factual.
It might help to establish your credentials though so that we can all appreciate the superior talent which you undoubtedly possess?
Since we seem to be thick…
I NEVER SAID I WAS BETTER THAN ANYONE ELSE. I STATED A FACT ABOUT HOW ADOBE PHOTOSHOP WORKS. LEAVE IT TO AN INSANE INDIVIDUAL TO INFER ANYTHING FURTHER FROM THE POSTS I HAVE MADE.
I’m done here. Continue your OT nonsense if you have the time to waste.
Give your photos a professional finish with sharpening in Photoshop. Learn to enhance details, create contrast, and prepare your images for print, web, and social media.
Related Discussion Topics
Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections
