Difference between copy and save?

[Sleepe]

I have looked over many of the different forums on this website, but I still don't know the difference. Saving a jpeg you have image quality loss, is that the same if I just copy that image to another file? Sometimes I select several images and then copy and paste to a different file or hard drive. Is there quality loss when I do this? From what I understand a Raw file is a Raw file unless you create a jpeg from it and then you still have the original. Is there any image loss when you copy or save a Raw file? Probally some basic questions to some of you, I just want to make sure I am archiving images in the best way. Thanks for your help.

[Curtis N]

The data loss with JPEGS happens when you SAVE the file. This is when the compression happens.

Copying a file won't change the file. It creates a copy of each bit of data, and every bit will be the same.

There is no data loss from copying or saving a RAW file. When you make changes with a RAW converter, it doesn't change the actual RAW data, it just changes the instructions on how to interpret that data when it's converted to an image.

[lostdoggy]

forgive me your King Measurebator but I think you forgot the part if you "open the file and save"

although most of us know what you mean but nOOb might not.

[Sleepe]

I did'nt know these forums were a place to be insulted? I don't have 3,164 posts like "lostdoggy" , this is a hobby for me. I have had one heart attack and been in a hospital twice because of my heart. I am just trying to find something that is relaxing to me and that I enjoy. Just looking for some constructive help here so that the "noob" might get something clarified, I thought my original post indicated how basic these questions are? Thanks

[jfrancho]

I'm sure lostdoggy meant no insult. "Noob" is just a term, not a personal attack. Merely opening and closing a .jpg has no affect on quality. Copying (or moving, for that matter) a file to a new location has no impact on quality. Opening a .jpg, editing it, by using a filter or image adjustment in a photo editing program, and resaving over the original is a bad idea. A better solution is to save as a copy, and edit that. That way if you ruin the picture, you can go back to the source, and start over. An even better idea would be to save that "working" or "development" file in a loseless, non compressed format. TIFF (.tif extension) is a popular choice. I use Photoshop, so I like to it's loseless, non compressed Photoshop Document (.psd) format. When I am satisfied that all editing that can possibly improve my bad pictures has been done, I save the PSD file. Then I make a copy by using Save As... and change the file format to .jpg. I always choose the highest quality (in Photodhop, that's 12). Now the picture is in a format that most commercial printers (grocery store/drug store labs, online labs like shutterfly.com, etc.) will accept. There are more subtle steps that you can take to improve quality throughout your workflow, and feel free to ask. Shooting in RAW mode is one - if your camera supports it and you have the software. Editing in 16 bit/channel mode is another. Using adjustment layers instead of just adjusting the main image is another. From there you can move on to selections and layer masks, combining images, HDRI, etc.... It's a never ending learning process. Don't worry if you think someone insulted you, you'll just waste time.

[lostdoggy]

My apology to Sleepe the nOOb reference was not direct to you. It was meant to be a general inclusion for anyone else reading this thread. The King Measurebator is the title given to CurtisN by the MODs. In no way did I intend to make fun of you.