My personal work flow is sort of like you suggest. I save the original as a
raw .tif or as a .psd and only use .jpg for the internet. If I am going to
save a working version of the image, I save that with GF as a .stn file.
However, my experiences with .jpg files has not been along the lines of
increasing artifacts with each iteration; when I have gotten artifacts in
.jpg files that were opened and resaved without any editing or changing of
quality levels, it has been due to some other factor than the mere opening
and closing of the .jpg file.
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
[mailto:owner-filmscanners@halftone.co.uk]On Behalf Of Lynn Allen
Sent: Friday, March 30, 2001 3:20 PM
To: filmscanners@halftone.co.uk
Subject: RE: filmscanners: JPEG Loss - File format
Mark wrote:
>>So the image DOES degrade with each iteration, whether or not it is
changed.
And Laurie answered:
>Aside from the fact that this does not sound right to me nor has it been my
experience ... [it would] not become so until a very large number of
iterations had been gone through.
This would be a little like "Schrodinger's Cat" in my experience, akin to
quantum physics. :-) Max Plank, I'm not, but I've seen images degrade
surprisingly in very few iterations, and not at all in others! Why this is
so, I don't know--my Windoze does "secret stuff" behind my back all the
time. Nor have I had the time to dig into it, but it actually *does* seem to
happen (see earlier posts and a JPEG I sent about 5 months ago).
My solution would be to do everything in TIFF (or your own personal
favorite), and JPEG only the final image. If you think you'll need to go
back in and change it, keep the Tiff or PSG on file, and change that.
Caution never hurts.
My 3-cents worth (again, but from experience)
--LRA
-----------------------------------------------
FREE! The World's Best Email Address @email.com
Reserve your name now at
