photoshop jpg vs nikon capture jpg

Discussion in 'Photoshop Tutorials' started by RBB, Aug 5, 2003.

  1. RBB

    RBB Guest

    hello
    i like to work out the images in photoshop, but i find out that,
    when saving images as jpg, photoshop gives me almost half of
    the quality of nikon capture, lets say, if photoshop gives me a file
    of 5mb (at maximum quality) capture gives me a file of 10mb,

    somebody knows if this is a big significance in loss of quality??

    --
     
    RBB, Aug 5, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RBB

    RBB Guest

    well i did tried, but at 20cmx25cm only
    is kind of hard to see the diference, looks like i got better quality by
    capture, but can be only my imagination, i have to wait until i can make
    some proofs at 50cmx60cm, unless somebody knows by experience
    regards
    richard
     
    RBB, Aug 5, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RBB

    Trev Guest

    Jpeg is a lossy compression format. In a nutshell it look's for pixels of
    simpler hue and lightness. notes there position saves one and throws the
    rest away. The setting you use dictates how close to similarity. At a low
    setting and done once you can have a good image with a low file size for
    posting or storing. But any further editing and saving will destroy more
    detail.

    Jpeg 2000 gives better results for same compression But is not as widely
    supported as yet.
     
    Trev, Aug 5, 2003
    #3
  4. RBB

    Tacit Guest

    i like to work out the images in photoshop, but i find out that,
    Photoshop gives you a choice of how much quality you want. What are you
    choosing? How much quality are you instructing Photoshop to preserve?

    More to the point: Why are you using JPEG in the first place, instead of, say,
    TIFF?
     
    Tacit, Aug 5, 2003
    #4
  5. RBB

    RBB Guest

    i use jpg, because the photo lab were they print my photos they
    only can make it from jpg, not with a tiff,
    what i am saying is that capture can make me a better jpg rather photoshop,
    and i was surprised about (i am talking of course of top qualities from both
    programs)
     
    RBB, Aug 5, 2003
    #5
  6. RBB

    Trev Guest

    Does this mean that you are getting jpegs from a Nikon camera that when
    opened in PS have a file size of 10 mb
    You are Then compressing them again by saving as jpeg giving a file size of
    5 mb. Is that 5 mb in explorer or 5mb when opened in PS.
     
    Trev, Aug 5, 2003
    #6
  7. RBB

    RBB Guest

    no, i use a raw file, (nef)
    that file if i save it in nikon capture editor makes me
    a much bigger jpg file than photoshop at maximum quality,
    almost double in the "excellent" option of capture.
     
    RBB, Aug 5, 2003
    #7
  8. RBB

    Trev Guest

    And are you opening the Nikon raw image in PS or the jpeg that you have
    already saved
     
    Trev, Aug 5, 2003
    #8
  9. RBB

    Warren Sarle Guest

    Bigger is not necessarily better. A JPEG file can contain all kinds of stuff
    besides the image.
     
    Warren Sarle, Aug 5, 2003
    #9
  10. RBB

    Fred Guest


    A common approach to compare compressed versions with the original ist
    to put them into layers and stack them above each other, then setting
    layer modes appropriately.

    The original goes to the bottom, its layer mode is set to 'normal'.

    Above the original you stack the compressed (e.g. JPEG) copies, their
    layer mode each set to 'difference'.

    Now you switch of every layer but the original and one of the compressed
    copies. The more non-black features you see, the less fidelity in the
    compressed image compared to the original.

    (Two originals stacked abobe each other - topmost in difference mode -
    would give you a completely black image).

    Do this with each of the compressed versions. The brighter the resulting
    image, the worse the compression in terms of quality.

    I must note though that this method does not take into account how our
    psychovisual system works, where some differences are more visible than
    other differences (e.g. brightness vs. hue, hue vs. saturation). But
    overall it can be helpful.

    HTH,
    Fred
     
    Fred, Aug 6, 2003
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

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

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.