
|

Saved By
JPEG
I’ve
heard from many sources that a JPEG file that’s opened and resaved
multiple times will lose quality. But I’m starting to wonder how
much this is really a factor. I did a quick test and showed the results
to others in the office, and no one could tell the difference after 10
saves. Your thoughts on this?
I
appreciate and welcome your skepticism. It shows how much you care
about image quality.
There are many occasions where I’m skeptical, too. It helps us
understand the technology and how it can be used to make great images.
I’ve run a simple test on a large file. The image printed here
was photographed using a Canon EOS 20D shooting in the RAW mode. I took
the image into Photoshop CS2 via Camera Raw, doing little to optimize
the shot. I saved the file as a .psd file, the native file format for
Photoshop.
Next, I saved a copy of the file as a JPEG, using maximum quality settings,
and called the file c01.jpg. (Keep in mind, however, that in many image
editors, maximum isn’t the default setting.)
Here’s the important part. I closed the original file in Photoshop
and opened c01.jpg. This has now reconstructed the compressed file.
Then, in order to simulate some editing, I cropped the file by a pixel
on the top and left. After that, I did a Save As, again selecting JPEG
for the copy, using maximum quality settings, and called it c02.jpg.
I closed c01.jpg, opened c02.jpg (reconstructing the file again) and
continued this process (Open, Crop, Save As, Close) until I got to c10.jpg.
Finally, I opened the original, together with the c10.jpg image and took
a look at them to see what kind of compression artifacts I’d get.
You can see them, although you have to enlarge the image a bit to do
so. Around the child’s head, you can see obvious compression artifacts.
You also can see them in the skin tones next to face details. While they
might not show up in certain uses like small Web images, they will appear
when printed.
For the record, I did this same test without adjusting the image at all—no
cropping—just Open, Save As and Close 10 times. The artifacts still
were there, but they were just a little less obvious.
So if you want to keep as much honest data in your images by keeping
them artifact-free for as long as possible, only compress when you have
to and stay away from using JPEG as an archival or storage format. Why
wouldn’t you want to use JPEG for archives? First of all, when
you save the image for the last time, you’re compressing it again,
so what you see on the screen isn’t what you saved. Also, can you
honestly say that you’ll never re-process that image? Might you
use it in a montage with another image, or would you edit differently
for a different type of output? If you can avoid compression, you’ll
have more imaging options in the future.
Timing Of File Saving
In
the May 2005 PCPhoto, you suggest the following: “[I resave] the
edited images in the native format of the image-editing application that
I’m using. When I’m satisfied with my adjustments, I also save
a copy of the file in TIFF format.” I believe this leads you to a
wrong sequence of events.
This
brings up a couple of misconceptions about saving image files. The first
is how saving or re-saving a file in a different format works. Let’s
take an example of a simple file shot with a digital camera and recorded
in a high-resolution JPEG format. I’ll call the file image.jpg.
First, I’ll open the file in Photoshop. Regardless of the name
of the file, it’s now sitting in Photoshop in Photoshop’s
native file format. Something similar happens in any image-processing
program. It can only edit in its native format.
I make some adjustments. Next, I decide to save the file, so I’ll
save it first in the native image format. At this point, I have to tell
Photoshop to save it in something other than its original file type,
even though it’s in the native file format while being worked on.
I go to File > Save As and select .psd and save the file as a copy.
Now, I end up with a file on my hard drive called image.psd.
I also want to save this file as a TIFF file so that I can put it on
a CD and send it in for publication. With the image still open in my
image editor, I select Save As and choose TIFF as the file
format. The new TIFF file is created on my hard drive, but the actual
file open in Photoshop is still in its native file format because, again,
an image-processing program can only make adjustments to its own file
format.
Next, to send the image via e-mail to friends, I select Save As and this
time choose JPEG. I could continue doing this, saving GIFs, PNGs, TARGAs,
PICTs, BMPs and all sorts of other file formats, but realize that I’m
still working from the native file format (which is the same as the image.psd
file). When you use Save As, a new file is created, but the open image
isn’t affected.
Ultimately, it makes no difference in what order you save files from
an open file in your image processor. It also doesn’t matter if
the files are compressed or uncompressed because as long as the file
remains open, it’s still at work in the native file format. It’s
only when the file is closed that you could have problems, but even then,
it would be with compressed files, such as JPEG, not uncompressed files
such as the native file format or TIFF. If you closed a file to a JPEG
format, then reopened it and saved it again as a TIFF, you’d lose
quality because of the compression changes.
It’s All In The Name
You’ve
said that you batch-rename all your photographs prior to archiving them.
Would you clarify what batch-renaming does without altering the original
JPEG files? What program might you recommend for batch-renaming?
|
Paul Castenholz
Colorado Springs, Colorado
|
First,
it helps to understand how file names are changed, as batch-renaming
is simply renaming many files at once. The long way would be to open
the file and re-save it with a new name. After reading the previous answer,
you know that this would not be the best procedure, particularly for
compressed file formats.
Another approach is to rename the file at the operating system level.
With Windows, right-click on the file, choose Rename, and the system
highlights the file name so you can type a new one. If you prefer, you
can click once on the file name, wait for a second, then click again
on the file name and type the new one. (You have to wait between clicks
or the system will recognize this as a double-click, and the file will
open.)
On a Mac, click once on the file name (not the icon) and it will highlight
so you can rename. You also can select the file and use Command+I to
bring up the info window with the file name highlighted so you can rename.
Notice that when you rename using either operating system, you’re
not opening the file; you’re just changing the name. This prevents
the file recompression we’re trying to avoid.
To automate the task of renaming, check to see if your image-editing
software has any batch or automatic functions. Many do and typically
are located under the file menu (in Adobe Photoshop, check in the Automate
menu). In addition, most browser programs, such as ACDSee from ACD Systems
or iView MediaPro, offer extensive batch-renaming capabilities.
If you have any questions, please send them to HelpLine, PCPhoto
Magazine, 12121 Wilshire Blvd., Ste. 1200, Los Angeles, CA 90025 or
[email protected].Visit
our Website at www.pcphotomag.com
for past HelpLine columns.
|

|