"Image Quality": JPEG normal vs. JPEG fine

Discussion in 'Photography Beginners' Forum' started by a1157814a, Dec 27, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. a1157814a
    Offline

    a1157814a New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2008
    Messages:
    139
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    What's the difference? Does fine produce bigger images? Does the image actually have BETTER QUALITY?
  2. tsaraleksi
    Offline

    tsaraleksi New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Greencastle Indiana
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    It refers to the strength of the compression being applied to the image. When a JPEG is saved, the computer/camera looks for areas of like color and saves them as one unit. When you turn up the compression, it becomes less choosy about what constitutes like colors, which can result in getting weird blocky spots, especially in finely graded areas like the sky.

    So 'fine' has more detail/accuracy than 'normal' though you'd have to test to see if it's a different that is a concern to you. Considering how inexpensive memory cards are these days, why not shoot for higher quality?
  3. Jurence
    Offline

    Jurence New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2008
    Messages:
    76
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Marietta, GA
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    JPEG works by looking at the color, and finding all instances of that color in an image, recording their coordinates. By "Fine" it is more distinct on the variations of color, so just off red is not the same as red, therefore higher quality.
  4. danjchau
    Offline

    danjchau New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    -------------
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
  5. dtornabene1
    Offline

    dtornabene1 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    While tsaraleksi answered your question, I have one for you. Why are you shooting in JPEG? Always, I mean ALWAYS shoot RAW. Now if you are using a camera without this ability, ignor my advice.

    -Nick
  6. lvcrtrs
    Offline

    lvcrtrs New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    I have my new D90 on Medium Fine becuase I was told that would be ok if I never printed over an 8x10. I can move up to Large Fine. Can you explain what "compress the image" is. Thank you, Sherry
  7. ANDS!
    Offline

    ANDS! New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,179
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Downtown
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0
    Even when shooting fast action sports? Theres a time and place for every image format. A time and place.

    Essentially you are reducing the file size, by compressing the "RAW" data (which is uncompressed - well technically so, although some cameras do offer RAW compression).
  8. tsaraleksi
    Offline

    tsaraleksi New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Greencastle Indiana
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    If I don't have to move pictures right away, I tend to shoot raw for sports as well-- heck, in such uncontrolled shooting environments raw is actually more valuable than in say, a studio shoot that you can control. If you have a camera that is severely limited when shooting raw I can understand, though I shot raw sports on the 20D with its 6 frame buffer and was alright.

    For me, jpeg is for when I have to get something done right away, which is, I think, why it's widely used in some professional circles.
  9. lvcrtrs
    Offline

    lvcrtrs New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2008
    Messages:
    602
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Pennsylvania
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Quote:
    Can you explain what "compress the image" is.

    Essentially you are reducing the file size, by compressing the "RAW" data (which is uncompressed - well technically so, although some cameras do offer RAW compression).
    __________________
    So compressing an image is only related to RAW not shooting in jpgs, Right?
  10. tsaraleksi
    Offline

    tsaraleksi New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Greencastle Indiana
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    No compression does not usually refer to raw shooting, it's for jpeg. The jpeg compression means that the computer finds areas of like color and treats them like one piece of information rather than individual pixels. As you turn up the compression, it considers less and less similar colors to be the same, which reduces the detail/accuracy of the image in favor of smaller file size. This is also why a jpeg image of a blank wall of one color is going to be much smaller in terms of megabites than one of a very detailed scene.
  11. Overread
    Offline

    Overread has a hat around here somewhere Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    20,631
    Likes Received:
    2,927
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    UK - England
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +2,929 / 0
    agreed JPEG is often used by journalists that have to have the shot taken, processed and on the web/to the printers in very short spaces of time, so they sacrifice the quality and added editing bonuses for speed - its also a good mode for holidays with family where you might get a lot of shots that you don't want to process and just want them for memories.

    Also I don't recomend people to start working in RAW - much better that they work in JPEG (or in JPEG + RAW) in the early days till they get their feet with editing since all RAW shots need to be edited. People need to be confident with levels, contrast, brightness, basic understanding of white balance, sharpening, noise removal and a smattering of curves helps as well. Starting off in RAW is jumping in the deep end
  12. danjchau
    Offline

    danjchau New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2008
    Messages:
    160
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    -------------
    Last edited: Dec 5, 2009
  13. majorpayne66
    Offline

    majorpayne66 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2008
    Messages:
    80
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Denver, Colorado
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Not trying to jack this thread, just thought I would jump in.
    I am shooting JPEG fine because I want to learn photography first and have little interest in learning to edit. I am just starting to edit some images with PP and am happy for now.. Sounds like I should move to JPEG+RAW for future editing. Is this right ? Can you elaborate on what JPEG+RAW does?
  14. tsaraleksi
    Offline

    tsaraleksi New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Greencastle Indiana
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Sure, but in your camera, jpeg compression refers to what I'm talking about. You can also change the image size, but that is a different parameter.

    Raw+Jpeg is pretty straightforward: it just gives you both a raw file and a jpeg file for a given picture.
  15. kundalini
    Offline

    kundalini Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    13,412
    Likes Received:
    1,837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    State of Confusion
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1,837 / 0
    Nikon does offer a Compressed NEF file format on the D300 (and a few other models I believe).
  16. tsaraleksi
    Offline

    tsaraleksi New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    1,045
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Greencastle Indiana
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Interesting-- how does that work? I assume it's not the same as the sRAW stuff Canon has brought out (ie smaller res raw files).
  17. kundalini
    Offline

    kundalini Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2007
    Messages:
    13,412
    Likes Received:
    1,837
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    State of Confusion
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +1,837 / 0
    I will quote from Thom Hogans Complete Guide for the D300:

    Interested in how to get the 12 bit of data back?
  18. McKaso
    Offline

    McKaso New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2008
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Nebraska Panhandle
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
  19. dtornabene1
    Offline

    dtornabene1 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2008
    Messages:
    320
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Chicago, IL
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0
    Quote: Originally Posted by dtornabene1 [​IMG]
    While tsaraleksi answered your question, I have one for you. Why are you shooting in JPEG? Always, I mean ALWAYS shoot RAW. Now if you are using a camera without this ability, ignor my advice.

    -Nick



  20. Overread
    Offline

    Overread has a hat around here somewhere Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 1, 2008
    Messages:
    20,631
    Likes Received:
    2,927
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    UK - England
    Gallery:
    Ratings:
    +2,929 / 0
    JPEG+RAW will save you 2 copies of every photo you take = one will be a JPEG verion and the other will be a RAW version. Thus you will be able to work with both - thus meaning that in the future when you can and want to edit in RAW you can come back and re-edit older photos. However the downside is that this does eat up more card space so you can take fewer shots on a set card size. YOu also have to store the photos on your computer as well.

    As for the JPEG vs RAW argument there are times when one wants to have photos that don't need editing to be usable, when they don't have space for enough RAWs on their memory card, when they don't like having to edit every shot or when speed of processing is required.

    JPEG allows this to be the case and thus has a purpose as a save formate - for many pros and amteurs the advantages of RAW nearly always win out over JPEG but one has to appraoch the choice with an understanding as to why they have chosen to use a mode rather than just blindly following the doctrine that one is better over the other
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page