Does converting jpeg to tiff make for better prints?

[Moonracer]

Hey I'm still a rookie to the digi world and was wondering if I convert some of the jpegs I have to tiff, will it yeild a better print? In my understanding a jpeg is compressed and converting it to a tiff would be uncompressed. Or does that only work if you shoot raw and convert that to tiff? I realize raw is the way to go but for older pics I have shot when I didn't have a camera that could shoot raw I'm kinda screwed. I have an epson R800 printer fyi. Thanks in advance. :)

[robertwgross]

It appears that your problem is JPEG files, and you can't go back and re-shoot RAW or anything else. In that case, the lossiness of JPEG is already stuck there, and you can't do anything about it. If you resave them, then it will only get worse.

I can't think of anything that would be gained by converting from JPEG to TIF, other than it just takes up more space.

---Bob Gross---

[kb244]

Keep in mind Garbage In = Garbage Out.

If you convert one lesser format to a higher format, the result of the higher format will be no better (or worse) Than the lesser format, if your jpeg wasnt giving you satifactory results nothing will. Best thing to do is shoot in raw, then downscale it to either Tiff or Jpeg, if you have an issue.

[dijitul+philm]

I introduced a thread a week or so ago on almost this topic and also saw somewhat arguable replies. My understanding of various file characteristics is such that I think the strict answer to your question is that converting your Jpgs to tiff will NOT improve them (although editing may), BUT converting them to tiff's changes them from lossy to lossless files and in so-doing will at least keep them from getting any worse as you later re-save them if desired - and IMHO that may make conversion to a large file acceptable if it's an important image. I also shoot mainly RAW but some Jpgs, edited, are very keepable despite increasing unpopularity in some circles.:rolleyes:

[cactusclay]

I was under the impression that ever time you opened a jpeg, it degraded it. So if you imiadiately turned it into a tiff or a copy of it, then wouldn't that help with the degredation from opening it to look at all the time?

[kb244]

The Jpeg will not degrade unless you make changes to it then save it again, just opening it and viewing it will not degrade it, yer thinking analog now (playing a tape over and over again).

[Moonracer]

Excellent! Thanks for all the informative responses. I'm going to get a book on digital but I needed a quick answer now....lol Yeah I wasn't sure if it worked like a zip file in that it extracts the rest of the data as you unzip it. Almost like it's there in the background waiting to be used and not taking up a lot of space. But I guess that is not the case. You get what you shoot. The jpegs that the rebel shoots are quite good but from my old A40 aren't so great of course. Anyway I got me a free raw converter so I'm good to go. Thanks again.

[RTMiller]

I can't think of anything that would be gained by converting from JPEG to TIF, other than it just takes up more space.
Wouldn't converting to TIFF allow you to make further changes and not experience any more loss of quality on those subsequent changes to the image?

[chris.bailey]

If you have jpg files now then converting them to tiffs makes no sense HOWEVER if you edit them (levels or size) then re-save as tiff or psd to avoid ongoing jpg compression degradation.

[chris.bailey]

Is there going to be a difference in print quality between a RAW image save as a level 12 jpg in photoshop vs a tiff file?

How long is a piece of string. In truth there is little difference in jpg qualities above about 8 and if its a new jpg that is well exposed and well colour balanced you wont see a lot in print against an equivalent tiff. If, however, you need to boost contrast, change the colour balance etc etc then the tiff will contain more information and this may show in the print. If you have spent a lot of money on getting a camera and lens that does the best you can afford, why then throw some of that information away?

[AndreyD]

I think I posted the same kine of question there couple of years before when I shoot only JPEG. The answer was: If you are going to correct your pictures (sharpness, saturation, curves, etc.) you better do it in TIFF, so, convert to tiff from jpeg - do you changes and then, if it's for internet - convert to jpeg again or keep it in tiff for archive or print.

[SkipD]

Hey I'm still a rookie to the digi world and was wondering if I convert some of the jpegs I have to tiff, will it yeild a better print? In my understanding a jpeg is compressed and converting it to a tiff would be uncompressed. Or does that only work if you shoot raw and convert that to tiff? I realize raw is the way to go but for older pics I have shot when I didn't have a camera that could shoot raw I'm kinda screwed.If all you want to do is just print the image that you have with no changes to it, there would be no advantage in saving the .JPG to .TIF.

However, if you want to do any editing it would be a good idea to first copy the image to the .TIF format. The reason is fairly simple. Each time you open and then re-save a .JPG (I am not sure if you have to do any editing in the process) you will lose image quality. This is not a problem with the .TIF or other uncompressed formats, such as .PSD (photoshop native).

[Curtis N]

Each time you open and then re-save a .JPG (I am not sure if you have to do any editing in the process) you will lose image quality.The thing to remember is that the compression is done, and the data is lost, when the file is saved. If you open a JPEG and don't change it but use the "save as..." command to create a new file, you just compressed the file again and threw away data.

If you just open a file and close it, or mess with it but don't save the changes, the original file remains as it was.