Is Tiff format lossless, no matter what Program you use?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by lbbss, Jan 26, 2008.

  1. lbbss

    lbbss Guest

    I have a free software I got called Ulead which is not comparable to
    photoshop. However I can still edit some picture for a book we are
    publishing. It allows me to save my edited pics in tiff format. Is
    this format lossless no matter what software you use. So I can re
    same as many times as I like without degrading the picture quality?
    thanks.
     
    lbbss, Jan 26, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. lbbss

    Pete D Guest

    "lbbss" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    >I have a free software I got called Ulead which is not comparable to
    > photoshop. However I can still edit some picture for a book we are
    > publishing. It allows me to save my edited pics in tiff format. Is
    > this format lossless no matter what software you use. So I can re
    > same as many times as I like without degrading the picture quality?
    > thanks.


    TIFF can be lossy depending on the settings you choose, just make sure you
    check the coices to do lossless saving.
     
    Pete D, Jan 26, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. lbbss

    John Bean Guest

    On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:53:29 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"lbbss" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >>I have a free software I got called Ulead which is not comparable to
    >> photoshop. However I can still edit some picture for a book we are
    >> publishing. It allows me to save my edited pics in tiff format. Is
    >> this format lossless no matter what software you use. So I can re
    >> same as many times as I like without degrading the picture quality?
    >> thanks.

    >
    >TIFF can be lossy depending on the settings you choose, just make sure you
    >check the coices to do lossless saving.
    >

    I'd be interested in hearing how you can make it lossy
    without going to extraordinary effort. TIFF is a container
    format that can encapsulate many types of image data, but
    typically it will contain 8- or 16-bit RGB image data with
    or without optional compression, all lossless.

    For all practical purposes the answer to the original
    question is "yes, TIFF is lossless".

    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, Jan 26, 2008
    #3
  4. lbbss

    Pete D Guest

    "John Bean" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:53:29 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"lbbss" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>>I have a free software I got called Ulead which is not comparable to
    >>> photoshop. However I can still edit some picture for a book we are
    >>> publishing. It allows me to save my edited pics in tiff format. Is
    >>> this format lossless no matter what software you use. So I can re
    >>> same as many times as I like without degrading the picture quality?
    >>> thanks.

    >>
    >>TIFF can be lossy depending on the settings you choose, just make sure you
    >>check the coices to do lossless saving.
    >>

    > I'd be interested in hearing how you can make it lossy
    > without going to extraordinary effort. TIFF is a container
    > format that can encapsulate many types of image data, but
    > typically it will contain 8- or 16-bit RGB image data with
    > or without optional compression, all lossless.
    >
    > For all practical purposes the answer to the original
    > question is "yes, TIFF is lossless".
    >
    > --
    > John Bean


    That wqs probably what I remember, compressed rather than lossy.

    Good to see you back John.

    Have you ordered a K20D yet?

    Cheers.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, Jan 26, 2008
    #4
  5. lbbss

    John Bean Guest

    On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:48:52 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    wrote:
    >Good to see you back John.


    :)

    >Have you ordered a K20D yet?


    No fear Pete, I'll see what Samsung has done with their
    sensor first. Never buy "MK 1" hardware or run any "V1.0"
    software...

    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, Jan 27, 2008
    #5
  6. lbbss

    Pete D Guest

    "John Bean" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:48:52 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    > wrote:
    >>Good to see you back John.

    >
    > :)
    >
    >>Have you ordered a K20D yet?

    >
    > No fear Pete, I'll see what Samsung has done with their
    > sensor first. Never buy "MK 1" hardware or run any "V1.0"
    > software...
    >
    > --
    > John Bean


    So you don't have a K10D or D or DS or K100D?
     
    Pete D, Jan 27, 2008
    #6
  7. lbbss

    Ron Hunter Guest

    lbbss wrote:
    > I have a free software I got called Ulead which is not comparable to
    > photoshop. However I can still edit some picture for a book we are
    > publishing. It allows me to save my edited pics in tiff format. Is
    > this format lossless no matter what software you use. So I can re
    > same as many times as I like without degrading the picture quality?
    > thanks.


    TIFF has no standard compression, so either lossy, or lossless,
    compression could be applied to the file. Generally TIFF files are
    compressed with LZW compression, which is lossless.
     
    Ron Hunter, Jan 27, 2008
    #7
  8. lbbss

    John Bean Guest

    On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:12:23 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    wrote:

    >
    >"John Bean" <> wrote in message
    >news:...
    >> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:48:52 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    >> wrote:
    >>>Good to see you back John.

    >>
    >> :)
    >>
    >>>Have you ordered a K20D yet?

    >>
    >> No fear Pete, I'll see what Samsung has done with their
    >> sensor first. Never buy "MK 1" hardware or run any "V1.0"
    >> software...
    >>
    >> --
    >> John Bean

    >
    >So you don't have a K10D or D or DS or K100D?


    Not a D or a K10D. The DS that I have is a second-generation
    design using the same sensor as the D and was was not on
    v1.0 firmware when I bought it, and the K100D is third
    generation using essetially the same hardware; it's the
    sensor more than the body itself that I wouldn't buy in "Mk
    1" form.

    The K10D is a good example - it suffered from some noise
    problems that weren't present in any of the earlier Pentax
    cameras and it wasn't entirely fixed with later firmware.
    Not that it isn't a good performer in its class, just that
    in can't do some of the things I use my DS for because of
    the relatively poor high-ISO performance. None of this was
    discovered until the camera was in the hands of users.

    That's what I meant by "never buy Mk 1 hardware or run
    "V1.0" software - I'll let others shake the bugs out before
    I even look at the possibility of buying one.


    --
    John Bean
     
    John Bean, Jan 27, 2008
    #8
  9. lbbss

    Pete Guest

    On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:06:20 -0800 (PST), lbbss wrote:

    > I have a free software I got called Ulead which is not comparable to
    > photoshop. However I can still edit some picture for a book we are
    > publishing. It allows me to save my edited pics in tiff format. Is
    > this format lossless no matter what software you use. So I can re
    > same as many times as I like without degrading the picture quality?
    > thanks.


    There is a TIFF format where the image is encoded as a JPEG, which I assume
    is usually lossy. If ULead supports this (which I doubt), I'm sure they'll
    also support lossless TIFF formats.
     
    Pete, Jan 27, 2008
    #9
  10. John Bean wrote:
    > I'd be interested in hearing how you can make it lossy
    > without going to extraordinary effort.


    PhotoShop-Windows: "Save as...", select TIFF, set compression to JPEG.
    Gimp: "Save as...", select TIFF, set compression to JPEG.
    PhotoFiltre: No options whatsoever.
    Paint.NET: No options whatsoever.
    IrfanView: "Save as...", select TIFF, set compression to JPEG.

    So far, 100% of the programs I checked either provided no way of
    selecting the type of compression at all or provided JPEG among the
    available compressions.

    > For all practical purposes the answer to the original
    > question is "yes, TIFF is lossless".


    For all practical purposes, when a beginner asks about a procedure
    where it's easy to make mistakes ("Look! By selecting JPEG and 50%, my
    files get so much smaller!"), it's advisable to make clear how to avoid
    those mistakes.
    --
    Toke Eskildsen - http://ekot.dk/
     
    Toke Eskildsen, Jan 27, 2008
    #10
  11. lbbss

    pltrgyst Guest

    On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 02:35:00 -0600, Ron Hunter <> wrote:

    >TIFF has no standard compression, so either lossy, or lossless,
    >compression could be applied to the file. Generally TIFF files are
    >compressed with LZW compression, which is lossless.


    "Baseline TIFF" (which is the standard TIFF which all TIFF implementations are
    required to support) files include no compression, CCITT Group 3 compression, or
    PackBits compression. All are lossless.

    "TIFF Extensions", which may not be supported by all readers, may employ CCITT
    T.4 or T.6 compression or LZW compression, both of which are lossless.

    The extensions also include an extension for JPEG, which may be either lossy
    (Baseline sequential process) or lossless (with Huffman encoding). The type of
    JPEG compression used in a particular image file can be determined by looking at
    the value of the JPEGProc tag: 1 is lossy, 14 is lossless. There are several
    free utilities which display the values of all tags in a JPEG file without you
    having to track through the internal linkages.

    So the correct answer is: Baseline TIFF files are always lossless. TIFF files
    using TIFF extensions or private tags may be lossy.

    -- Larry
     
    pltrgyst, Jan 27, 2008
    #11
  12. lbbss

    Pete D Guest

    "John Bean" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:12:23 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    > wrote:
    >
    >>
    >>"John Bean" <> wrote in message
    >>news:...
    >>> On Sun, 27 Jan 2008 09:48:52 +1100, "Pete D" <>
    >>> wrote:
    >>>>Good to see you back John.
    >>>
    >>> :)
    >>>
    >>>>Have you ordered a K20D yet?
    >>>
    >>> No fear Pete, I'll see what Samsung has done with their
    >>> sensor first. Never buy "MK 1" hardware or run any "V1.0"
    >>> software...
    >>>
    >>> --
    >>> John Bean

    >>
    >>So you don't have a K10D or D or DS or K100D?

    >
    > Not a D or a K10D. The DS that I have is a second-generation
    > design using the same sensor as the D and was was not on
    > v1.0 firmware when I bought it, and the K100D is third
    > generation using essetially the same hardware; it's the
    > sensor more than the body itself that I wouldn't buy in "Mk
    > 1" form.
    >
    > The K10D is a good example - it suffered from some noise
    > problems that weren't present in any of the earlier Pentax
    > cameras and it wasn't entirely fixed with later firmware.
    > Not that it isn't a good performer in its class, just that
    > in can't do some of the things I use my DS for because of
    > the relatively poor high-ISO performance. None of this was
    > discovered until the camera was in the hands of users.
    >
    > That's what I meant by "never buy Mk 1 hardware or run
    > "V1.0" software - I'll let others shake the bugs out before
    > I even look at the possibility of buying one.
    >
    >
    > --
    > John Bean


    I have bothe Ds and K10D and will certainly wait til at least the end of the
    year beofre thinking about the K20D unless users convince me otherwise. Mind
    you I do not seem to have the noise problems of which you speak but there
    you go, different people have different experiences with the same devices.

    Still the 14MP sensor looks very good and the rest of the camera is basicly
    the same as the K10D.

    Pete
     
    Pete D, Jan 28, 2008
    #12
  13. lbbss

    Martin Brown Guest

    In message <Xns9A32B5C89F55Btokeeskildsen@130.225.247.90>, Toke
    Eskildsen <> writes
    >John Bean wrote:
    >> I'd be interested in hearing how you can make it lossy
    >> without going to extraordinary effort.

    >
    >PhotoShop-Windows: "Save as...", select TIFF, set compression to JPEG.
    >Gimp: "Save as...", select TIFF, set compression to JPEG.
    >PhotoFiltre: No options whatsoever.
    >Paint.NET: No options whatsoever.
    >IrfanView: "Save as...", select TIFF, set compression to JPEG.
    >
    >So far, 100% of the programs I checked either provided no way of
    >selecting the type of compression at all or provided JPEG among the
    >available compressions.


    There is also the possibility in some applications to save images as
    CMYK rather than RGB and the colour space transformation inevitably
    produces losses from rounding errors and out of gamut values.
    >
    >> For all practical purposes the answer to the original
    >> question is "yes, TIFF is lossless".

    >
    >For all practical purposes, when a beginner asks about a procedure
    >where it's easy to make mistakes ("Look! By selecting JPEG and 50%, my
    >files get so much smaller!"), it's advisable to make clear how to avoid
    >those mistakes.


    TIFF will allow you to encapsulate almost anything inside it. Although
    the implied meaning is usually RGB with optional lossless compression
    there are enough programs that offer JPEG inside TIFF to catch beginners
    out and even some who should know what they are doing.

    Regards,
    --
    Martin Brown

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
     
    Martin Brown, Jan 28, 2008
    #13
  14. lbbss

    John Turco Guest

    Pete D wrote:

    <edited for brevity>

    > I have bothe Ds and K10D and will certainly wait til at least the end of the
    > year beofre thinking about the K20D unless users convince me otherwise. Mind
    > you I do not seem to have the noise problems of which you speak but there
    > you go, different people have different experiences with the same devices.
    >
    > Still the 14MP sensor looks very good and the rest of the camera is basicly
    > the same as the K10D.
    >
    > Pete



    Hello, Pete:

    Did you read Digital Photography Review's take, on the K10D? Here's an
    excerpt, from its conclusion:

    Pentax K10D Review (December 2006, Phil Askey): Conclusion
    http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk10d/page25.asp

    "When we reviewed the K100D we thought Pentax had got their image
    processing just right, however the single element of the entire K10D
    equation which left us scratching our heads was just that. Either a
    poorly implemented demosaicing algorithm or a strange choice of
    sharpening parameters means that while the K10D's JPEG images have
    plenty of 'texture' they can lack the edge sharpness we're used to
    seeing from semi-pro digital SLR's."

    "Pentax may well have been aiming for a smooth film-like appearance
    but I at least feel that the inability to tweak this out by increasing
    sharpness is a mistake. That said it's unlikely you'll see this
    difference in any print up to A3 size, it's a 100% view thing so you
    have to decide if that's important to you or not. To get that absolute
    crisp appearance you'll need to shoot RAW, and use Adobe Camera RAW or
    another third party converter (as the supplied converter produces
    similar results to the camera)."

    "With the criticism out of the way we return to the K10D as a
    'photographic tool', something it does very well. It's a camera you get
    used to very quickly and never really leaves you searching for the
    correct setting or control. It's also a camera you can grow into, the
    unique exposure modes are both creatively interesting and useful, a
    range of options such as this encourage you to experiment. At just
    under $900 it's a very strong proposition, so despite our reservations
    about the slightly soft image processing the K10D just achieves a
    Highly Recommended."

    So, Phil Askew thinks that the K100D beats the K10D, in image quality.
    Further, he gives the former an unqualified "Highly Recommended" rating,
    whereas, he states the latter "just achieves a Highly Recommended."

    Hmmm...if somebody disguised the K10D as a Canon camera, do you believe
    he'd be more impressed with it? <g>


    Cordially,
    John Turco <>
     
    John Turco, Feb 3, 2008
    #14
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. ARosenblat

    jpeg to tiff and back to tiff

    ARosenblat, Dec 25, 2003, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    814
    Fuzzy Logic
    Jan 9, 2004
  2. A.Melon

    Whattsa Matter, Dark Matter??

    A.Melon, May 16, 2004, in forum: DVD Video
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    647
    A.Melon
    May 16, 2004
  3. Peter Frank
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    1,117
    Chris Cox
    Dec 13, 2004
  4. Volker Hetzer

    lossless Coolpix raw to tiff conversion

    Volker Hetzer, Jan 16, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    3
    Views:
    343
  5. Jenna Topping

    BMP to TIFF or TIFF to BMP- any loss?

    Jenna Topping, Jan 21, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    726
    None40
    Jan 23, 2005
Loading...

Share This Page