TIFF vs. JPG
Out of context: Reply #9
- Started
- Last post
- 13 Responses
- formed0
We used to keep everything as tiff - psd > tiff (no jpegs), but the files just got too cumbersome. We now deliver high res jpegs to clients, saved at 12.
As noted a ton of times, it is pointless to go from jpeg to tiff. Only reason we kept the tiff at all was to have a 100% reliable, uncompressed version that a client couldn't accidentally screw up (easy to do with a jpeg if you resize, if it gets resaved, etc.)
As for the size, tiffs are simply larger. The compression is lossless, so it doesn't really "save" much space. jpegs delete data when saved, even at the highest quality (although you'd be hard pressed to tell).
LZW is lossless, therefore there is no degradation of quality (it just compresses the file, like a zip or rar, but does not alter the image - jpeg compression is lossy and DOES alter the image)
If I was sending perfect, super high res photographs I'd keep it as tiffs, but we send mostly renderings, which has a billion photos, pieces, etc.
- "a billion"?
come on, ive told you a billion million times ' dont exaggerate!!!'23kon
- "a billion"?