Pops_uk said:
Hi Jay, We both agree that a Joint Photographic Experts Group format image is automatically decompressed when opened. A higher level of compression results in lower image quality, and a lower level of compression results in better image quality, (we agree albeit, the difference is minimal at Photoshop’s highest setting) but with to days processing power of your average personal computer and the cheapness of storage (media) why, settle for second best?
Regards Glyn
Because the difference between second best and best is for all practical and
even most impractical purposes, imperceivable. But the cost difference is more
than a factor of two. CD-Rs are inexpensive, but they aren't free. My CD-R
burner is fast, but it isn't instantaneous. I use a 5MP camera and suspect an
8MP or larger looms on the horizon.
My originals are in JPEG format and their archival is vital. Modified versions are
nice to keep and may save me time in the future with making a print etc., but
I don't consider them vital. So using twice the storage for a difference I can't
perceive makes no sense to me.
But these are decisions everyone must make for themself. I think if people
make some side-by-side comparisons of their own images, they will see that
they must go through extraordinary steps to perceive a difference between a
"best quality" JPEG and a lossless format. And even then, the difference is
slight and not necessarily even subjectively worse.
And for Scampo or others confused by this issue, the only time there is any
question of whether to save in JPEG or a lossless format (TIFF, BMP, etc.)
is when the original image is modified. Then you must choose which format
you would prefer to save your modified version in. If you are archiving original
files, there is nothing to be gained (at least from a standpoint of image quality)
by converting them to a lossless format.