www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - Perhaps this is not the hobby for me.
www.photomacrography.net Forum Index
An online community dedicated to the practices of photomacrography, close-up and macro photography, and photomicrography.
Photomacrography Front Page Amateurmicrography Front Page
Old Forums/Galleries
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 
Perhaps this is not the hobby for me.
Goto page Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
rjlittlefield
Site Admin


Joined: 01 Aug 2006
Posts: 18365
Location: Richland, Washington State, USA

PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:05 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
is there degradation from shooting in raw, changing to jpeg or tiff to stack in Zerene and then uploading to PM?

Well, the maximum image size that can be uploaded to photomacrography.net is only 1024 pixels square, with file size 300 KB max.

Those numbers are so small that it's inconceivable there would not be degradation from camera to uploading.

So you have to decide: is uploading to photomacrography.net your only goal? Or do you have other goals, and if so, what are their requirements?

For my own photography, the goal is always to get the highest quality image that I can, consistent with the amount of work that I'm willing to put into it. That means there are tradeoffs, which I have to think about for each situation.

For deep stacks shot in studio, where I can closely control the lighting and don't want to pay the costs of shooting raw, I shoot high quality JPEG.

For shorter stacks, especially in the field or when the lighting is especially challenging, I shoot raw. Usually I convert those to 16-bit TIFF, but if I plan to retain the Zerene Stacker project with converted images embedded in it, then sometimes I'll convert to JPEG because JPEGs are so much smaller than 16-bit TIFF.

Quote:
IOW, is there any advantage to shooting in raw or tiff when uploading to PM?

In some cases, sure. If the lighting is challenging, then shooting in raw may give you more control that ends up producing a better result even at the reduced size required for posting. Or if your camera treats JPEGs harshly, typically by oversharpening, then actual-pixel crops may show better results from shooting TIFF. I have even seen cases where TIFF resolved a bit more detail than JPEG, though that varies a lot between cameras.

In the end, I'm afraid there's no substitute for running your own tests and seeing what the tradeoffs are for your equipment and your goals.

--Rik
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
JH



Joined: 09 Mar 2013
Posts: 980
Location: Vallentuna, Stockholm, Sweden

PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 12:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tevans9129 wrote:
is there any advantage to shooting in raw or tiff when uploading to PM?


No -or at least almost never.

I normally take both jpg and RAW. I stack the jpg:s with the function "Stack New Images (Pmax)" in Zerne mostly for the fun to follow the stacking process but also to stop if the pictures does not turn out OK.

Usually the jpg stack is good, and almost always good enough for the webb.

But sometimes I get colour banding problems whit jpg:s that I do not get whith TIFF:s.

The example is from this post:.
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=223272#223272

Here is a comparison between the banded JPG to the left and TIFF stack to the right. This is not an exact comparision I have done some adjustments to the RAW:files before saving them as TIFF:s and there is a differens in the number of picture used for the two stacks.



Best regards Jörgen Hellberg
_________________
Jörgen Hellberg, my webbsite www.hphoto.se
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 99
Location: TN

PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 1:38 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
is there degradation from shooting in raw, changing to jpeg or tiff to stack in Zerene and then uploading to PM?

rjlittlefield wrote:
Well, the maximum image size that can be uploaded to photomacrography.net is only 1024 pixels square, with file size 300 KB max.
Those numbers are so small that it's inconceivable there would not be degradation from camera to uploading.

My question was poorly worded for my intent. I know there is degradation uploading to PM what I was trying to determine is there an advantage to shooting in raw and then converting to jpeg to upload over shooting in jpeg fine to begin with. Both scenarios under same identical conditions, nothing done to files before stacking. My belief is no, but I have been wrong before.


rjlittlefield wrote:
So you have to decide: is uploading to photomacrography.net your only goal? Or do you have other goals, and if so, what are their requirements?

For my own photography, the goal is always to get the highest quality image that I can, consistent with the amount of work that I'm willing to put into it. That means there are tradeoffs, which I have to think about for each situation.

All of my shooting is done in RAW and then converting to TIFF for stacking, unless, the purpose is only for posting in PM.

rjlittlefield wrote:
For deep stacks shot in studio, where I can closely control the lighting and don't want to pay the costs of shooting raw, I shoot high quality JPEG.

For shorter stacks, especially in the field or when the lighting is especially challenging, I shoot raw. Usually I convert those to 16-bit TIFF, but if I plan to retain the Zerene Stacker project with converted images embedded in it, then sometimes I'll convert to JPEG because JPEGs are so much smaller than 16-bit TIFF.

Makes sense to me.


Quote:
IOW, is there any advantage to shooting in raw or tiff when uploading to PM?


rjlittlefield wrote:
In some cases, sure. If the lighting is challenging, then shooting in raw may give you more control that ends up producing a better result even at the reduced size required for posting. Or if your camera treats JPEGs harshly, typically by oversharpening, then actual-pixel crops may show better results from shooting TIFF. I have even seen cases where TIFF resolved a bit more detail than JPEG, though that varies a lot between cameras.

In the end, I'm afraid there's no substitute for running your own tests and seeing what the tradeoffs are for your equipment and your goals.

--Rik

I agree with that, OTOH, if I can learn from others that have previously done the testing and has the knowledge then why not save my testing for other things.

I appreciate your thoughts and explanations, thanks.

Ted
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
tevans9129



Joined: 30 Nov 2017
Posts: 99
Location: TN

PostPosted: Wed Dec 20, 2017 4:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JH wrote:
tevans9129 wrote:
is there any advantage to shooting in raw or tiff when uploading to PM?


No -or at least almost never.

I normally take both jpg and RAW. I stack the jpg:s with the function "Stack New Images (Pmax)" in Zerne mostly for the fun to follow the stacking process but also to stop if the pictures does not turn out OK.

Usually the jpg stack is good, and almost always good enough for the webb.

But sometimes I get colour banding problems whit jpg:s that I do not get whith TIFF:s.

The example is from this post:.
http://www.photomacrography.net/forum/viewtopic.php?p=223272#223272

Here is a comparison between the banded JPG to the left and TIFF stack to the right. This is not an exact comparision I have done some adjustments to the RAW:files before saving them as TIFF:s and there is a differens in the number of picture used for the two stacks.



Best regards Jörgen Hellberg


Thanks for the comments and images Jorgen, interesting.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    www.photomacrography.net Forum Index -> Equipment Discussions All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group