File Question about Elements Digital Software

[Ysarex]

Ysarex:

1. Wouldn't the quantity of banding and artifacts depend on how much jpeg compression the camera or editing program is set for?

Yes, both the original camera JPEG quality as well as what's used in the editing program. In the above example the camera was set to create the highest quality JPEG. I saved the example files here as high quality.

2.Wouldn't the resolution of the original also affect the quantity of banding and artifacts?

Yes. I made a point of noting that. Problems caused by editing JPEGs were a more serious concern when our cameras had 10 and 12 megapixel sensors. Today's 24 and 46 megapixel sensors go a long way to simply swamping the artifacts and banding in resolution. If you can't see it does it matter?

3 . Why is there no banding or artifacts in the Processed RAW image considering you had to convert to an 8-bit jpeg? What was it before you started editing? What editing program did you use? (8 or 16-bit?)

The camera was a 10 megapixel w/12bit ADC Sony camera. The Sony SR2 raw file in C1 was processed in the ProPhoto color space with a 16 bit color depth. I saved it as a high quality JPEG which will not show banding/artifacts if it's not there in the original from C1 -- it wasn't. Once the JPEG is created however any additional color/tone editing of that file will create artifacts and banding degradation. The JPEG must be 8 bit and the compression grid becomes embedded in the image.

 

[AlanKlein]

Yes, both the original camera JPEG quality as well as what's used in the editing program. In the above example the camera was set to create the highest quality JPEG. I saved the example files here as high quality.

Yes. I made a point of noting that. Problems caused by editing JPEGs were a more serious concern when our cameras had 10 and 12 megapixel sensors. Today's 24 and 46 megapixel sensors go a long way to simply swamping the artifacts and banding in resolution. If you can't see it does it matter?

The camera was a 10 megapixel w/12bit ADC Sony camera. The Sony SR2 raw file in C1 was processed in the ProPhoto color space with a 16 bit color depth. I saved it as a high quality JPEG which will not show banding/artifacts if it's not there in the original from C1 -- it wasn't. Once the JPEG is created however any additional color/tone editing of that file will create artifacts and banding degradation. The JPEG must be 8 bit and the compression grid becomes embedded in the image.

Would the raw image you worked with the show banding if it was processed in an 8-bit editor like Elements?

 

[Ysarex]

Would the raw image you worked with the show banding if it was processed in an 8-bit editor like Elements?

No. You'd do the initial processing as much as possible in ACR and you're working there in 16 bit ProPhoto -- no banding. Once the image is 8 bit try and avoid big changes in tone/color -- do those first in ACR. Here's that raw file if you'd like to play with it:

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

 

[AlanKlein]

No. You'd do the initial processing as much as possible in ACR and you're working there in 16 bit ProPhoto -- no banding. Once the image is 8 bit try and avoid big changes in tone/color -- do those first in ACR. Here's that raw file if you'd like to play with it:

Dropbox

www.dropbox.com

Thanks, I'll play with it later.

Currently, I also have Lightroom V6 licensed, I believe that's 16 bit? My calibrated screen is set up for sRGB though not ProPhoto. Does that matter much?

I usually use LR to edit my pictures - both film scans and digital images. Of course, when done editing, I create a jpeg for downloading onto the web or making slide shows using Premiere Elements.

 

[Ysarex]

Thanks, I'll play with it later.

Currently, I also have Lightroom V6 licensed, I believe that's 16 bit?

Yes.

My calibrated screen is set up for sRGB though not ProPhoto. calibrate Does that matter much?

Calibrate and profile the display and you should be fine.

I usually use LR to edit my pictures - both film scans and digital images. Of course, when done editing, I create a jpeg for downloading onto the web or making slide shows using Premiere Elements.

Sound right -- when you make a JPEG you've finished editing.

 

[RacePhoto]

I don't know what misinformation, but the point was and I'll make it short. (how unlike me) If you open an image and save it 1,000 times but never close and never re-open, you lose nothing. It's only the compression and re-opening that causes data loss.

Saving doesn't destroy any information. Editing doesn't destroy any data. You could leave a file open for a month, and then save it, and it would only be a first generation version.

Read the original post? That's what I answered. "when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO

Yeah the Internet is an infinite echo chamber of misinformation. I'll never disagree with that either. My top ten list is how a crop camera gives you some magical kind of zoom from an impossible same lens at the same focal plane. There is no free zoom.

 

[Ysarex]

"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO

Yes, especially if you're editing a JPEG -- the image that you're editing continues to lose. If you don't save it to disk the loss isn't permanent but editing JPEGs causes loss.

 

[AlanKlein]

I don't know what misinformation, but the point was and I'll make it short. (how unlike me) If you open an image and save it 1,000 times but never close and never re-open, you lose nothing. It's only the compression and re-opening that causes data loss.

Saving doesn't destroy any information. Editing doesn't destroy any data. You could leave a file open for a month, and then save it, and it would only be a first generation version.

Read the original post? That's what I answered. "when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO

Yeah the Internet is an infinite echo chamber of misinformation. I'll never disagree with that either. My top ten list is how a crop camera gives you some magical kind of zoom from an impossible same lens at the same focal plane. There is no free zoom.

How do you save a image without closing it? If you work on editing an image today, and then save it as a jpeg, it's closed. Then let's say you come back next week to continue editing. You have to "open" the edited jpeg again before editing some more. Then when you close it and save it as a jpeg again, you'll add even more artifacts. That's why you want to save it as a tiff until you're all done editing. Then, create the final jpeg.

 

[RAZKY]

How do you save a image without closing it? If you work on editing an image today, and then save it as a jpeg, it's closed. Then let's say you come back next week to continue editing. You have to "open" the edited jpeg again before editing some more. Then when you close it and save it as a jpeg again, you'll add even more artifacts. That's why you want to save it as a tiff until you're all done editing. Then, create the final jpeg.

Can you not leave a JPEG open for an unlimited time, and edit it many times, without saving it after each edit?

 

[Ysarex]

Can you not leave a JPEG open for an unlimited time, and edit it many times, without saving it after each edit?

You could and that would avoid multiple recompression degradation from resaving as a JPEG. But it's entirely impractical and of arguably moot value given that you're editing the JPEG which is the much larger source of degradation. If you're going to edit a JPEG simply save as a TIFF and that will avoid recompression degradation but it will not prevent degradation due to editing.

 

[RAZKY]

You could and that would avoid multiple recompression degradation from resaving as a JPEG. But it's entirely impractical and of arguably moot value ...

Pretty much what I thought. Personally, I don't do JPEGs for serious work - I shoot RAW (NEF, 14-bit uncompressed), convert to 16-bit TIFF and edit as needed. Thanks for responding.

 

[AlanKlein]

Can you not leave a JPEG open for an unlimited time, and edit it many times, without saving it after each edit?

Don't you have to save it in some form before you shut the computer down or you lose power to your computer? Or does Elements save it in some sort of a temporary file.?

 

[RacePhoto]

Don't you have to save it in some form before you shut the computer down or you lose power to your computer? Or does Elements save it in some sort of a temporary file.?

It was just that the OP asked about during editing.

"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO it doesn't, as you use the program.

You can save and save and save and save, even make (and save) 99 versions, Control-Z and re-edit, and save that version. Resize, and revert. You lose nothing except the first decompression. That was the question, that's my answer.

Yes of course if you close and reopen, the image will degrade with each version. A smaller image will show the negative effects and pixelation even more than a larger image. Not only soft, but color is lost.

Open and save as a TIF, you now have a master file TIF version. I don't know how many times you can open and save and re-open a TIF before it shows degradation? It doesn't. BUT creating the TIF already introduces some data loss, because the photo is processed vs a RAW which is the Raw data, without color information or processing.

The flaw in the "make a TIF and you can edit that all you want" theory is, creating the TIF loses some data initially as it ads the color data.

Meanwhile:

"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO - not as you use the program. Only when you save and then re-open that saved file.

 

[Ysarex]

It was just that the OP asked about during editing.

"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO it doesn't, as you use the program.

Yes using the tools in Elements to edit the tone/color of your image will result in degradation -- loss. The loss is caused by the editing interaction with the original lossy compression.

You can save and save and save and save, even make (and save) 99 versions, Control-Z and re-edit, and save that version. Resize, and revert. You lose nothing except the first decompression.

Decompression doesn't cause loss. JPEG Compression and recompression cause loss.

That was the question, that's my answer.

Yes of course if you close and reopen, the image will degrade with each version. A smaller image will show the negative effects and pixelation even more than a larger image. Not only soft, but color is lost.

Open and save as a TIF, you now have a master file TIF version. I don't know how many times you can open and save and re-open a TIF before it shows degradation?

No limit -- a TIFF files saved without lossy compression does not lose from recompression.

It doesn't. BUT creating the TIF already introduces some data loss, because the photo is processed vs a RAW which is the Raw data, without color information or processing.

Raw data is color information.

The flaw in the "make a TIF and you can edit that all you want" theory is, creating the TIF loses some data initially as it ads the color data.

No, the flaw in the "make a TIFF and you can edit that all you want" is that if the TIFF is made from a JPEG then the original lossy compression transfers to the TIFF.

Meanwhile:
"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO - not as you use the program.

Yes it does.

Only when you save and then re-open that saved file.

 

[jadin]

It was just that the OP asked about during editing.

"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO it doesn't, as you use the program.

Yes using the tools in Elements to edit the tone/color of your image will result in degradation -- loss. The loss is caused by the editing interaction with the original lossy compression.

You guys are in agreement.

You can save and save and save and save, even make (and save) 99 versions, Control-Z and re-edit, and save that version. Resize, and revert. You lose nothing except the first decompression.

Decompression doesn't cause loss. JPEG Compression and recompression cause loss.

Again. In agreement.

That was the question, that's my answer.

Yes of course if you close and reopen, the image will degrade with each version. A smaller image will show the negative effects and pixelation even more than a larger image. Not only soft, but color is lost.

Open and save as a TIF, you now have a master file TIF version. I don't know how many times you can open and save and re-open a TIF before it shows degradation?

No limit -- a TIFF files saved without lossy compression does not lose from recompression.

Still agreeing.

It doesn't. BUT creating the TIF already introduces some data loss, because the photo is processed vs a RAW which is the Raw data, without color information or processing.

Raw data is color information.

Again.

The flaw in the "make a TIF and you can edit that all you want" theory is, creating the TIF loses some data initially as it ads the color data.

No, the flaw in the "make a TIFF and you can edit that all you want" is that if the TIFF is made from a JPEG then the original lossy compression transfers to the TIFF.

You're both right. One is saying a TIFF from a RAW file, the other is saying a TIFF from a lossy JPEG.

Meanwhile:

"when you are using the various tools in say Elements, does your picture continue to lose detail as you use the program?"

NO - not as you use the program.

Yes it does.

See above. I think it depends on your definition of data / detail.

But let's say you have a master TIFF - regardless of where it came from - that has already been saved and closed. Editing THAT file will not continue to lose detail as you use the program, only when saving as a JPEG. Concur?