RSS
 

Posts Tagged ‘JPEG’

RAW vs JPEG: Which File Type Is Best?

15 Sep

The post RAW vs JPEG: Which File Type Is Best? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Darren Rowse.

RAW vs JPEG: Which file type is best?

Which is right for you, RAW vs JPEG? For beginners, it’s one of the toughest questions out there – but I’m here to help you make a confident, informed decision, one that you won’t regret five, ten, or twenty years down the line.

Specifically, I’m going to explain:

  • What RAW and JPEG files actually are
  • The advantages (and disadvantages) of RAW over JPEG
  • The advantages (and disadvantages) of JPEG over RAW
  • Software to consider for RAW and JPEG images
  • Much more!

So if you’re ready to determine the perfect file format for your photos – and put this pesky question to bed, once and for all – then let’s get started.

RAW vs JPEG: What’s the difference?

These days, pretty much every camera – including smartphones – has the option to shoot in RAW, JPEG, or both. These are file formats, simply different ways of rendering and storing your image after you hit the shutter button.

However, while both RAWs and JPEGs will do a decent job of faithfully capturing a scene, they aren’t equally capable and do offer different functionalities, benefits, and drawbacks.

So let’s look at some quick definitions before doing an in-depth comparison:

What is a RAW file?

RAW files are unprocessed, unfiltered, raw data that comes straight from your image sensor.

Therefore, a RAW file cannot be viewed by the human eye (it’s not a visual display!), and must be converted to another file format such as a JPEG or a TIFF for actual viewing.

Because RAW files are unprocessed, they have zero sharpening, chromatic aberration removal, saturation, contrast, etc., applied to them. In fact, when RAW files are initially rendered for viewing, they tend to look quite unimpressive, with low contrast, low saturation, and a touch of softness.

Note that different cameras produce different RAW files, such as .CR2, .NEF, and .CR3. So when processing a RAW file, your software must be compatible with the specific RAW format.

What is a JPEG file?

A JPEG is a standard image file format that’s readable by pretty much every image program on the market, as well as internet browsers. In other words, a JPEG is an essentially universal method of displaying images.

However, unlike a RAW file, a JPEG is a processed version of an image. In fact, a JPEG image always starts out as a RAW file, but then undergoes various modifications, often including:

  • Compression (where some image data is deliberately discarded)
  • Sharpening
  • Increased saturation
  • Increased contrast

This processing occurs in your camera, by the way, not on the computer (though you can certainly further process a JPEG in a program such as Lightroom). So as soon as you put your memory card into your laptop and pull up a JPEG, it’s already been edited in camera.

camera and memory cards

The benefits of shooting in RAW

Why shoot in RAW over JPEG? Here are the most important reasons:

1. RAW files are higher quality

Remember how I mentioned that JPEG files are compressed and are missing data, whereas RAW files are, well, raw?

This comes with a serious consequence: RAW files can be converted into beautiful, large, detailed images. And while JPEGs can look great, you may end up with unpleasant compression artifacts such as banding, halos, loss of detail, and more.

2. RAW files allow for greater highlight and shadow recovery

RAW files contain information at dynamic range extremes – the brightest highlights and the darkest shadows. So even when an image appears totally blown out or underexposed, you can often recover detail in clipped areas.

But JPEGs discard this information, so if you blow out the sky and want to bring back some detail, you’re probably out of luck.

3. RAW files allow for extensive image adjustments (i.e., post-processing)

RAW files are uncompressed. Therefore, you have plenty of latitude when post-processing your photos. You can tweak contrast, change colors, adjust tones – and a RAW file will take it all in stride.

JPEGs, on the other hand, cannot be modified extensively. And when pushed or pulled too much, JPEGs will start to show banding and other problematic artifacts.

The benefits of shooting in JPEG

Why shoot in JPEG over RAW? Let’s take a look at the primary JPEG pros:

1. JPEGs are small

Remember how RAW files contain all of the information captured by your camera, whereas JPEGs are compressed? Well, it majorly reduces JPEG file size – so while a RAW file might take up 20 MB of storage (or more), JPEGs take up substantially less.

This is a big deal for two reasons:

  1. If you’re working on a computer with limited space and you don’t want to spend lots of money on external hard drives, JPEGs can be a lifesaver.
  2. You can fire off bursts of shots without stopping because your camera can record JPEGs much faster than RAW files. Here, the specifics will depend on your camera; for reference, the Canon EOS R5 can shoot around 350 JPEGs at 12 frames per second, compared to 180 uncompressed RAW files.

2. JPEGs require zero processing time

Don’t want to spend lots of time behind the computer? No problem; JPEGs are instantly viewable and are processed in camera.

Yes, you can process them beyond your camera’s sharpening, contrast, and saturation adjustments, but it’s not a requirement, and you can share JPEGs to social media without stopping for a lengthy Lightroom edit.

So which should you choose, RAW or JPEG?

That depends on you – on what you like to shoot and how you like to shoot it.

If you want to create high-quality prints, or you want to spend time post-processing (i.e., enhancing and correcting) your photos, or you want the ability to do either of those things just in case, then you absolutely must be shooting in RAW.

In fact, if you’re on the fence about shooting in JPEG or RAW even after reading this far, then I highly recommend you just switch your camera over to RAW and leave it there. RAW files are just too darn useful to give up unless you have a really good reason to shoot JPEGs.

And if it helps, nearly all professionals and serious hobbyists shoot in RAW, especially those who photograph:

  • Landscapes
  • Wildlife
  • Flowers
  • Insects
  • Architecture
  • Cityscapes
  • Weddings/events

Of course, as I emphasized above, there are reasons to shoot in JPEG. I’d recommend going the JPEG route if you absolutely hate post-processing and don’t think you’ll ever want to work in Lightroom; that way, you’ll have easily shareable images that require no extra work. And if you don’t have the storage for RAW photos, then JPEGs are the way to go.

I’d also recommend using JPEGs if you’re photographing on a very tight deadline (self-imposed or otherwise) and you need to get your images uploaded and viewable, fast. If you’re shooting a family party, for instance, you could work in JPEG then immediately share all the images on Facebook without a significant delay for editing.

Finally, you might consider using JPEGs if you want to use your camera’s burst mode without restraint. The other option, however, is purchasing a camera with a very deep buffer, and I’d urge you to go this route if possible (that way, you can shoot indiscriminately and you can capture RAW files).

So to recap:

Unless you have a serious reason to shoot JPEGs, then shoot RAW. And by the way: most cameras have the option to shoot both RAW and JPEG files (the RAW+JPEG mode). So if you need shareable JPEGs but also want the option to do in-depth processing or printing, it’s a great mode to try.

What software is good to use with RAWs?

If you do decide to shoot in RAW, you’ll need some form of post-processing software; that way, you can convert your photos from RAW to JPEG for viewing and sharing.

Here are some of my favorite RAW editing programs, both free and paid:

  • Adobe Lightroom Classic
  • Adobe Lightroom CC
  • Adobe Camera Raw
  • Capture One
  • ON1 Photo RAW
  • Darktable
  • ACDSee
  • DxO PhotoLab
  • RawTherapee

RAW vs JPEG: final considerations

Now that you’ve finished this article, you’re hopefully ready to pick your file format and start shooting.

As I emphasized above, RAW is probably the better way to go, unless you’re really drawn to the JPEG format.

And RAW+JPEG can be the best of both worlds, assuming you can handle the extra storage requirements.

The above article on RAW vs JPEG files was submitted by Richard and Rebecca from Finn Productions. You can see their Flickr account here.

RAW vs JPEG camera menu

The post RAW vs JPEG: Which File Type Is Best? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Darren Rowse.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on RAW vs JPEG: Which File Type Is Best?

Posted in Photography

 

JPEG XL image format promises smaller files, backwards compatibility and more

14 Jul

JPEG, the lossy compression standard for images used on the Internet and digital cameras, might receive a much-needed upgrade by year’s end. The creators of JPEG XL claim their free open-source format offers up improvements that will result in a significant reduction in global bandwidth and storage costs.

The JPEG image format was first developed by researchers at the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in the 1980s. Over the years, due to its many advantages over other formats of the time, it became the go-to format for photos on digital cameras and the World Wide Web. At the time, it was revolutionary, cutting down on the time it took for images to load (think 5 seconds compared to minutes) and could store up to 50 images, rather than 1, on a memory card.

For almost 30 years, this standard, which uses data compression to keep files small, has remained largely unchanged and unchallenged, even after several unsuccessful attempts. That, however, could change. Several formats introduced in the past to replace JPEG, including JPEG 2000, JPEG XR, Google’s WebP, and even HEIC have fallen short of widespread adoption. JPEG XL is hoping to rewrite that script.

JPEG XL can take existing JPEG files and transcode them, losslessly, to reduce their size without compromising their quality. A single JPEG XL file can be stored on a server and serve both JPEG and JPEG XL clients. A JPEG XL file can also be restored to the initial JPEG through backwards compatibility without compromising the file.

The format will benefit photographers by including a wide color gamut, HDR (high dynamic range), and high bit depth images.

The format will benefit photographers by including a wide color gamut, HDR (high dynamic range), and high bit depth images. Support for printing, large panoramas, 360-degree imagery, and image bursts is also available. Optimized for responsive web environments, it’s also addressing current Internet user needs on a wide range of devices such as tablets and smartphones.

‘JPEG XL further includes features such as animation, alpha channels, layers, thumbnails, lossless and progressive coding to support a wide range of use cases including but not limited to photo galleries, e-commerce, social media, user interfaces and cloud storage,’ reads the official overview. What the creators promise is superior image quality, a codec ratio smaller than the typical 20:1 to 50:1, and encoding plus decoding without hardware acceleration on mobile devices.

The standard has four specifications which will be combined to make JPEG XL the standard, going forward, by the end of 2021, so long as the project doesn’t encounter any setbacks. Even if it gets set in stone before the end of the year, it may take time for it to be compatible on all the applications and platforms available. To find out if your browser supports JPEG XL, you can check here. Those interested in the coding system can check out the white paper.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on JPEG XL image format promises smaller files, backwards compatibility and more

Posted in Uncategorized

 

When to Shoot in RAW vs JPEG (and Why)

31 Dec

The post When to Shoot in RAW vs JPEG (and Why) appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Simon Ringsmuth.

when to shoot in RAW vs JPEG and why

There has been a longstanding debate in the photography community about RAW vs JPEG file formats. Both have their benefits and drawbacks, so determining which one to use isn’t as simple as you might think.

In fact, rather than thinking about RAW vs JPEG as a single choice to make, it’s best to reframe the question entirely. So don’t think about which format to always use.

Instead, think about when to use RAW and when to use JPEG.

RAW vs JPEG example photo
Nikon D750 | Nikon 70-200 f/2.8G ED VR II | 180mm | 1/350s | f/4 | ISO 2000

Understanding RAW and JPEG formats

If you’re new to digital photography, terms like “RAW” and “JPEG” might seem a little strange. So what actually is a RAW photo? And what is a JPEG photo?

When you press the shutter button on your camera, it takes in color and light data, then converts the data into a photograph. RAW is one type of file format that your camera can use, and it’s found on dedicated cameras like DSLRs and MILCs.

A RAW file is the unprocessed image data straight from the sensor. It must be converted to a usable image format via a program such as Lightroom or Luminar. RAW files are much larger than JPEG files, and they often don’t look good until they are edited. Therefore, a longer post-processing time is required, and memory cards fill up quicker. But you do get a flexible file that can be endlessly edited to look exactly how you want.

beautiful sunset shot in RAW
Nikon D750 | Nikon 70-200 f/2.8G ED VR II | 200mm | 1/500s | f/11 | ISO 100.
A RAW file gave me far more freedom to edit this photo compared to if it had been shot as a JPEG.

JPEG images are RAW files that are instantaneously converted by the camera into a format that is easy to share. In the process, however, JPEGs lose some of the data captured by the image sensor.

JPEG files have widely used since 1992, and the original intent was to create an image format that was a nice compromise between quality and file size. If you’re old enough to remember the early days of the internet, you know that bandwidth was a precious commodity, and a single image file could take several minutes to download on a dial-up modem. JPEG helped solve that problem and quickly became the dominant format for digital photos. This legacy lives on today, and nearly every digital camera and mobile device can shoot JPEG photos.

So which format is better? That’s a question only you can answer, and it all depends on your photographic goals. But it’s a bit like deciding between a truck and a sedan, a microwave and an oven, or whether to wear shoes or sandals.

In other words, it’s not a question of whether JPEG is better than RAW or RAW is better than JPEG. Instead, it’s about deciding when to shoot in RAW or JPEG and why.

fungus shot in JPEG
Fujifilm X100F | 23mm | 1/170s | f/2 | ISO 200.
I didn’t want to edit this photo, so I shot a JPEG and was perfectly happy with the result.

When to shoot in RAW

There’s no question that RAW files offer much more flexibility during the editing process. When it comes to recovering highlights, bringing out detail in the shadows, adjusting exposure, and all other types of edits, RAW reigns supreme.

While RAW does have some downsides, the advantages can easily outweigh the disadvantages.

In general, I recommend shooting RAW in the following situations:

You’re shooting paid photos for clients

When working with clients, you want all the flexibility you can get. The best-laid plans can often go awry, and despite all your preparedness, you can still end up with images that are too dark, too bright, or need severe color-correcting.

This is where RAW excels, as it lets you recover as much information as possible to fix errors or tweak the image to your liking.

couple portrait
Nikon D750 | Nikon 70-200 f/2.8G ED VR II | 200mm | 1/3000s | f/2.8 | ISO 400.
Here, the backlighting resulted in a severely underexposed image. I was able to save it because I shot in RAW.

You know you’ll be doing extensive editing

If you are shooting in extreme conditions, you’re pushing your camera and your skills to the limit, or you’re even just taking normal pictures that you know you will be editing, then RAW is a good choice.

If I’m taking more than just casual snapshots, I like to err on the side of caution; I’ll shoot in RAW, even if I’m not sure how much editing I’ll be doing.

a tree branch hanging in front of the water
Nikon D7100 | Nikon 50mm f/1.8G | 50mm | 1/350s | f/1.8 | ISO 110

You might want to edit your images years later

This one is a little tricky, since it’s difficult to predict whether you will or won’t want to edit your pictures years or decades down the line.

Some photographers like to shoot everything in RAW just to be on the safe side. While it’s impossible to predict the future, it’s difficult to imagine any scenario in which RAW files would offer less flexibility than JPEGs or other file formats.

We might reach a point years down the road where machine learning and artificial intelligence are able to give RAW-style flexibility for lossy formats like JPEG, but we’re not there yet. RAW formats are used by world-class institutions like the National Archives in the United States. Such facilities certainly know a thing or two about storing images for the long term, and if RAW is good enough for them, then it’s likely good enough for you.

boy running RAW vs JPEG
Nikon D7100 | Nikon 50mm f/1.8G | 50mm | 1/350s | f/4 | ISO 200.
When my kids were little, I didn’t know as much about photography as I do now. I shot everything in RAW, just in case I needed to edit my photos years later.

When to shoot in JPEG

Some people are of the opinion that all pictures should be shot in RAW, but I tend to disagree.

While RAWs do have advantages over JPEGs, there’s nothing wrong with capturing JPEG files if they work for you. Just because some people shoot in RAW doesn’t mean you have to!

In general, I recommend using JPEG in the following situations:

You like the look of your camera’s JPEG files

The biggest advantage of RAW is also one of its key disadvantages; having the freedom to adjust your photos ad infinitum isn’t much of an advantage if you don’t really want to edit them.

All camera manufacturers configure their cameras to process JPEGs with a certain look or style. As such, the straight-out-of-camera JPEG files can look much better than RAW files. And if you don’t plan on editing your pictures, then these JPEGs are probably the better option.

girl photographed in JPEG
Fujifilm X100F | 23mm | 1/200s | f/2 | ISO 200.
I like the Fujifilm JPEG files just fine, and as such, I almost never shoot in RAW with my Fujifilm camera.

I shot in RAW frequently – until I got my Fujifilm X100F camera. I quickly realized that I quite liked the look of its JPEG film simulations such as Classic Chrome and Provia. Soon, I had stopped shooting in RAW entirely on my Fujifilm, because I just liked the JPEGs better. I could certainly edit the RAW files, but I realized over time that I didn’t want to. I liked the JPEGs just the way they were (and I still do!).

If you like how your JPEG files look, then don’t worry about RAW and keep using JPEG. It doesn’t make you any less of a person, or photographer, just because you want to let your camera do some of the editing for you.

And even though JPEG files can’t be edited as much as RAWs, you can still make some basic changes, such as adjusting exposure and correcting the color. You shouldn’t expect the same flexibility that you’d get when editing RAW files – but if that’s not your goal, then JPEGs will be fine.

JPEG vs RAW sheep
Fujifilm X100F | 23mm | 1/2000s | f/2 | ISO 200.
I shot this as a JPEG and was still able to tweak the white balance just a bit in Lightroom. Would RAW have worked better? Perhaps. But I like this shot anyway.

You’re capturing casual snapshots of friends and family

RAW files have more flexibility than JPEG files – but if you’re shooting lots of casual pictures or snapshots of friends, family, and everyday life, then RAW just might be overkill.

RAW files take up more space on your memory card, they can be a chore to edit, and they are also difficult to share. The latter is especially important for these slice-of-life photos, and most casual shots don’t really require much in-depth editing, anyway.

people on a dog walk
Fujifilm X100F | 23mm | 1/480s | f/5.6 | ISO 200

When you shoot JPEG files, you lose some of the flexibility of the RAW format – but you gain the ability to easily share photos, and you don’t have to deal with conversions and editing software.

On family vacations, it’s not uncommon to share memory cards before everyone leaves, just to make sure everyone has everyone else’s photos. This is just easier with JPEGs, since every device and operating system works great with the JPEG file format.

You’re photographing sports and fast action

This might seem a little counterintuitive because sports and action shots sometimes need to be edited afterward. It’s difficult to nail the exposure and white balance when shooting some types of sports, which is why photographing in RAW can be useful.

However, it’s not uncommon to end up with hundreds or even thousands of photos after a sporting event, especially if you use your camera’s continuous shooting mode. The sheer quantity of images can turn the task of editing into an arduous process that ends up taking far too much of your time.

boy kicking a soccer ball
Nikon D750 | Nikon 70-200 f/2.8G ED VR II | 98mm | 1/750s | f/2.8 | ISO 100.
I shot JPEGs with the Overcast white balance setting, so all I had to do was crop a few shots, instead of meticulously editing the hundreds of photos I got from this game.

As a result, it can actually be a good thing to shoot in JPEG when you know you will end up with a massive amount of photos. You can learn to tweak JPEG settings in-camera, such as lifting the shadows and manually setting the white balance to maintain uniformity across your pictures. This isn’t the same as editing each image by hand, but it’s a lot easier!

The internal buffer on your camera won’t fill up as quickly when shooting in JPEG mode due to the smaller file size. This means you can take more images without waiting around while your camera transfers them to your memory card. Those precious seconds can make all the difference at sporting events or other situations where the action comes frequently and you don’t want to miss a shot.

backyard pool
Fujifilm X100F | 23mm | 1/450s | f/5.6 | ISO 200

A Compromise: RAW+JPEG

If you’re still not sure when to use RAW vs JPEG files, just know that there is no correct answer. Whichever file type you choose is fine as long as it works for you.

If you feel comfortable using RAW, then great. If you’d rather shoot in JPEG, go for it. And if you want the best of both worlds, you really can have your cake and eat it, too.

You see, most cameras let you choose a mode called RAW+JPEG. As you might expect, this mode saves both RAW and JPEG files for every shot. It can eat through your memory cards in a hurry, but as long as you don’t mind the increased storage requirements, you can avoid making the RAW vs JPEG decision altogether and just use both formats.

coneflower close-up
Nikon D7100 | Nikon 50mm f/1.8G | 50mm | 1/350s | f/2.4 | ISO 100

RAW vs JPEG: Conclusion

When I first started getting into photography, I suffered from a severe case of RAW guilt.

I thought that if I didn’t use RAW, then I wasn’t a real photographer, because real photographers shot in RAW. I thought JPEGs were for the unwashed masses and should be shunned by any picture-taker who took themselves seriously. It took me far too long to realize that this type of gatekeeping has no place in photography.

As long as you have a process that works and you’re happy with the result, then don’t let anyone tell you that you’re doing it wrong. And if you haven’t yet figured out when to use RAW vs JPEG and you’re looking for some advice, then hopefully this article gave you some ideas.

I’d love to hear your thoughts about when you shoot in RAW versus JPEG and why. So share your opinion in the comments section below!

The post When to Shoot in RAW vs JPEG (and Why) appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Simon Ringsmuth.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on When to Shoot in RAW vs JPEG (and Why)

Posted in Photography

 

JPEG Committee explores using AI and blockchain tech for image compression

25 Feb

On February 17, the JPEG Committee published the results from its 86th Meeting, detailing some of the topics of discussions and potential future plans. Among other things, the committee issued a Call for Evidence on what it refers to as learning-based image coding solutions, something following the JPEG AI activity the committee launched a year ago. As well, the committee has expanded discussions on the use of blockchain technology and distributed ledger technologies (DLT) for JPEG.

During the 85th JPEG meeting last year, an effort dubbed JPEG AI was initiated in order to explore the use of image coding technologies to increase compression efficiency. During the new 86th JPEG meeting, this effort was expanded to a formal Call for Evidence, which is described as the first step in considering the ‘standardization of such approaches in image compression.’

In the JPEG AI Call for Evidence, JPEG Committee states:

‘This activity aims to find evidence for image coding technologies that offer substantially better compression efficiency than available image codecs with models obtained from a large amount of visual data and that can efficiently represent the wide variety of visual content that is available nowadays.’

In addition, the most recent meeting featured an Open Discussion Session on Media Blockchain that involved ‘interactive discussions’ on media blockchain and its various uses, namely its suitability for addressing ‘challenges in transparent and trustable media transactions.’ The committee has shared the presentations and pitch slides from these discussions on its website.

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on JPEG Committee explores using AI and blockchain tech for image compression

Posted in Uncategorized

 

Twitter rolls out Live Photo support on iOS, improved JPEG compression

13 Dec

Twitter has updated its platform with two new useful features for photographers: iOS Live Photos support and better JPEG quality. Both changes are live now.

Live Photos are a type of image that can be captured using an iPhone or iPad; in addition to the image, Live Photos include the 1.5 seconds of action that happened before and after the photo was snapped. In order to make it possible to share these images, Twitter is first converting them into GIFs.

To share a Live Photo, iPhone users must launch the Twitter mobile app and select the image from their Camera Roll. Once the Live Photo is selected, the user can tap the new ‘GIF’ option located in the bottom left corner of the image. This will result in Twitter converting and sharing the Live Photo as a GIF.

Converting Live Photos into GIFs has been the primary method used to share the video versions of these images. Lack of direct support on many platforms has forced many iPhone users to turn to apps like Lively. Twitter’s new support merely removes this time-consuming manual conversion process, enabling iPhone users to rapidly share their Live Photos with followers.

In addition to the new direct Live Photos to GIF conversion feature, Twitter is also now publishing JPEGs with their original encoding, according to company engineer Nolan O’Brien.This eliminates the transcoding and compression that obliterates image quality when viewed in full size. O’Brien notes that the thumbnail version of JPEGs will still be transcoded to cut down on file size and that only the bitmap encoding is preserved, not the metadata. As well, the new encoding preservation is only live for images uploaded using Twitter for Web.

Twitter for Web has supported 4096 x 4096 image uploads since last year, according to O’Brien, who details some upload scenarios in which the platform will still encode images:

Articles: Digital Photography Review (dpreview.com)

 
Comments Off on Twitter rolls out Live Photo support on iOS, improved JPEG compression

Posted in Uncategorized

 

HEIF Files: Do They Mean the End of the JPEG Format?

07 Nov

The post HEIF Files: Do They Mean the End of the JPEG Format? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.

HEIF files

During a recent meeting about the recently announced Canon 1D X Mark III with Digital Camera World, Canon product intelligence specialist David Parry dropped a bombshell:

“We’ve moved on to HEIF files,” Parry said.

While Canon later walked back the statement, claiming that they “have no plans to abandon JPEGs,” but instead wish to “give users a new image option” in the Canon 1D X Mark III, the comment got plenty of people talking. And the reason is clear: If Canon is adopting HEIF files alongside its JPEGs, might we soon see the company scrap JPEGs entirely? And what about Nikon, Sony, Fujifilm, and Olympus?

In other words, does Canon’s move to HEIF files signal the end of JPEGs?

For photographers who have been using JPEGs for decades, this might come as a shock. While HEIF files have been in the media for the past couple of years, ever since Apple added them to their iOS devices and Macs, no major camera manufacturer has adopted HEIF files – until now.

And while some users may dismiss HEIF files as another overhyped “JPEG killer” which will disappear in a few years, there is reason to believe that HEIF files are here to stay.

To understand why, let’s take a closer look at HEIF files and what they offer over JPEGs.

HEIF files vs JPEGs

The biggest difference between HEIF files and JPEGs is their respective file sizes:

JPEGs are small, but HEIF files are tiny.

In fact, HEIF files are often billed as half the size of JPEGs, but with the same (or better) quality. This means that you can store far more HEIF files on a device than you can JPEGs, without a loss in quality.

How is this possible?

Simply put, compression has improved. JPEG files debuted way back in the 1990s, whereas HEIF is a relatively new image file format. So when it comes to compression, what a JPEG can do, a HEIF file can do better.

And this results in smaller files with limited quality loss.

Compression isn’t the only area where HEIF files shine. HEIF files can also store more color information than JPEGs, which means that your HEIF photos will look better, and can avoid the unpleasant color-banding effects that sometimes come with JPEGs.

And what about compatibility? Surely JPEGs are far more established than HEIF files, given their universal popularity?

Back in 2017, when Apple adopted HEIF files, this was a real discussion. Some applications couldn’t deal with HEIF files, and that was a problem.

But now, two years later…

HEIF files can be used by pretty much any program you’d need. The compatibility issues are gone, and we’re left with a file format that just seems all-around superior to JPEGs.

So while JPEGs are the file format of the present and the past, HEIF files are likely the format of the future.

Now I’d like to know your thoughts:

Do you think HEIF files will replace JPEGs? And how do you feel about this change? Share your thoughts in the comments below! And respond to our poll regarding whether you’re happy about the shift to HEIF files: 

Note: There is a poll embedded within this post, please visit the site to participate in this post’s poll.

The post HEIF Files: Do They Mean the End of the JPEG Format? appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Jaymes Dempsey.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on HEIF Files: Do They Mean the End of the JPEG Format?

Posted in Photography

 

RAW or JPEG: A Game Of Formats! [video]

27 Oct

The post RAW or JPEG: A Game Of Formats! appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Caz Nowaczyk.

In this great video by Nicolas Doretti, he explains the differences between using RAW and JPEG formats.

?

RAW or JPEG?

If you have struggled to understand the need to shoot in RAW format over JPEG, this video goes into great detail exploring and explaining why you can obtain so much detail from RAW files.

Nicholas explains the differences in BIT depth and how pixels are composed of 3 layers.

He also explains how to arrive at 16 million colors in an image.

This is how the bit depth corresponds to the number of colors it holds.

  • 8-bits: 16 million colors
  • 10-bits: 1 billion colors
  • 12-bits: 68 billion colors
  • 16-bits: 281 billion colors

Photos taken by your camera are around 12/16 bits of information. All of these values – that’s the RAW file. It’s not really an image; it’s the raw data taken by the sensor.

When you record your image in jpeg, your camera takes the raw information from the sensor and compresses it into an 8-bit format. As there are not as many spaces, it also applies a treatment to the image. It adjusts the contrast and saturation of colors.

The processing values depend on the selected image profile on your camera.

If you record in RAW, the camera does no editing to your image at all. It retains the 12/16-bits of information (68-281 billion colors). It is then up to you to process your images and get the most from all of that information.

The RAW image you see on your computer screen is simply an interpretation of the raw data that your camera records. Each change you make in your editing software reinterprets this data.

RAW is not an image format, as such. Each brand has it’s own version of RAW. CR2 for Canon, ARW for Sony, NEF for Nikon, RW2 for Panasonic, DNG, and other extensions exist.

Using RAW allows you to search for information, whereas there is no information in the jpeg.

Nicolas uses an image example in both jpeg and RAW formats to show you the possibilities of editing with both formats. You will notice how much more information can be gained in the shadow and highlight areas of the RAW file.

Nicolas also touches on the argument of professional photographers not needing to shoot RAW because they should be good enough to get a perfect exposure in-camera. He has an interesting take on this. He talks about retouching and uses examples of photos dating back to 1861 that were retouched.

Watch and see what your thoughts are here! Share any comments on this information in the comments below!

 

You may also find the following helpful

  • The Basics of RAW files {and what to do with the darn things}
  • RAW Files: Digital Manifestations of the Emperor’s New Clothes
  • Quick Beginner’s Guide to Processing RAW Files in Photoshop Adobe Camera Raw
  • How to do Powerful RAW Conversions with Luminar 2018
  • ACDSee Photo Studio Ultimate: Efficient RAW Workflow for Professionals
  • Is Shooting RAW+JPEG the Best of Both Worlds?

The post RAW or JPEG: A Game Of Formats! appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Caz Nowaczyk.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on RAW or JPEG: A Game Of Formats! [video]

Posted in Photography

 

RAW vs JPEG Format Editing in Lightroom

17 Apr

The post RAW vs JPEG Format Editing in Lightroom appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Kunal Malhotra.

As a photographer, you have most likely heard or read discussions about RAW vs JPEG file formats. It is said that a RAW file consists of a lot more data and details as compared to a JPEG file. How about we conduct a few experiments and talk about why one file format is better than the other?

If you are someone who mostly edits in Lightroom CC, get ready to know some shocking reasons why you must avoid using JPEG files. Going forward in this article I am sharing a few experiments that I conducted using the JPEG and RAW files of the same shot. I am sure that by the end you will be convinced to always edit using the RAW file format.

Experiment 1

Adjusting Highlights and Whites

The left image shows the jpeg file, while the right image shows the RAW file.

In this first experiment, I am going to import a JPEG file as well as a RAW version of the same frame in Lightroom. You can see these in the image above. You will notice that the sky in this frame is overexposed and the details are not visible because I exposed for the foreground. In this test, I am going to bring down the highlights as well as the whites all the way to -100 and see what happens with both JPEG and RAW files.

The left jpeg image has struggled to retrieve the highlights, while the RAW file on the right has retrieved the highlights well.

Surprising, isn’t it? If you look at the sky in both the JPEG and RAW files, you can see the difference quite clearly.

The details of the clouds in the JPEG (left) file become ruined when I reduced the highlights and whites to recover the details. Whereas, the RAW file (right) does an excellent job in recovering the details in the sky – even though it was completely overexposed.

This experiment concludes that if you wish to recover the highlights in a photo, RAW files achieve much better results. The JPEG file would fail at recovering details from highlights and whites.

Experiment 2

Detail and Sharpness

The JPEG image on the left is soft, while the RAW file on the right is sharp.

In this experiment, for reference purposes, I again placed the JPEG file on the left and the RAW file on the right. In the image above, I have a 1:1 zoom in Lightroom CC to show you something very interesting. Look at the difference in the sharpness and details on the face of the person. The difference is quite shocking. One would conclude that these are two different shots, with the left one being softer. However, that is not the case here. This is the same shot but just in different file formats.

Next time if you are shooting portraits or events, you know that shooting in RAW can help you preserve far more details than the JPEG file. I usually shoot in RAW and JPEG. Then I use the RAW file to edit my photos while using the JPEG files for reference or shortlisting purposes only.

Experiment 3

White Balance Adjustment

Experimenting with White Balance, I moved the slider to the warmer end of the White Balance scale. The JPEG image on the left, has lost detail and is flat, while the RAW file on the right, is far more usable.

In this last experiment, I wanted to check if adjusting the white balance does make any difference. You may have heard that a RAW file allows you to later adjust the white balance as per your desire? But how different is it from JPEG? Let’s find out in this experiment.

Here I moved the temperature slider all the way to the warmer side in both the RAW and the JPEG files. Interestingly, the JPEG file (left in the image above) was almost unusable for me. At this stage, the sky was almost flat and lacked contrast. Whereas, the RAW file with the same exposure had so much information stored that at this stage the elements in the frame had details and contrast.

Conclusion

The above experiments demonstrated a few key reasons why I always prefer using a RAW file in Lightroom to ensure my final image has maximum details. My advice here would be to shoot in RAW and JPEG to be on the safe side. If you wish to make a quick edit or directly use the image for social media, go with JPEGs. If you wish to edit the same image seriously, use the RAW file.

I hope next time you import an image to Lightroom, these experiments will encourage you to shoot and edit in RAW format.

Feel free to share your views in the comment section.

The post RAW vs JPEG Format Editing in Lightroom appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Kunal Malhotra.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on RAW vs JPEG Format Editing in Lightroom

Posted in Photography

 

Secret Camera Settings that Supercharge your JPEG Photos

09 Jan

The post Secret Camera Settings that Supercharge your JPEG Photos appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Simon Ringsmuth.

Shooting pictures in RAW definitely has its advantages, but there are plenty of good reasons you might want to shoot using the JPEG format as well. It really comes down to personal preference, and both types of file formats have their pros and cons.

One of the biggest assets of the RAW format is that you can adjust your images as much as you want in programs like Lightroom or Luminar. Whereas the lossy compression algorithms used to create JPEG files leave much less room for post-processing flexibility. For this reason, to get the most out of your JPEG files, there are some important settings in your camera you should learn and customize to get your photos looking their best.

When you use RAW, you have access to the full data readout from your camera’s sensor. None of the data used to create your image was tossed out by your camera to compress the image and save memory card space. When shooting JPEG, your camera makes a series of determinations on the fly. It calculates what it thinks are the best values for various settings to get a pleasing photo almost like following a recipe to bake a cake. You can tweak that recipe to get the final output to be more customized to your taste. Doing so can be extremely helpful in many different photography settings.

White Balance

White balance is perhaps the most critical setting for JPEG shooters to understand. Getting this right can have a massive impact on how your images look. If you notice your images looking slightly yellow or blue, it’s likely due to the white balance not being calibrated correctly. Most people only use the Auto White Balance option which leaves the heavy lifting up to the digital brain inside your camera.

However, it’s straightforward to set the white balance by yourself and get much better results, particularly in tricky lighting situations. Especially indoors.

Setting the white balance at this cat show was really tricky due to the old fluorescent lights at the venue. Several of my auto white balance shots had a yellow tint, so I set the proper white balance in my camera and was able to achieve much better results.

It only takes a few seconds to set the white balance when shooting JPG and it can save you a lot of hassle in the long run. All DSLR and Mirrorless cameras, as well as most point-and-shoots, come with a variety of white balance settings. You can specify these if you know a little bit about the lighting conditions in which you are shooting. Many cameras have options such as Sunlight, Cloudy, Incandescent, Shade, even different types of fluorescent lighting. These can be selected to help make your photos look as good as possible.

The Overcast white balance setting gave me just the right look I was aiming for in this shot.

In my experience, the Auto white balance setting works great outdoors. However, when shooting inside, even the latest cameras can get tripped up by the many different types of artificial light. If you’re at a school, office, sporting event or another indoor setting with fluorescent lights, just choosing that option in your White Balance menu can make a huge difference to how your photos turn out. Try different settings and see what you like. Chances are, one of the pre-selected settings can help a great deal if you notice your photos looking a little blue or orange.

The picture I wanted to take was not what I ended up with. I missed a good opportunity largely due to improper white balance settings. A richer, more natural tone was what I wanted, but the image came out much cooler than I intended because I did not take a few seconds to set a proper white balance.

Finally, you can go all out and set a white balance of your own, which isn’t as big of a deal as it might sound. Every camera has its way of doing this. As long as you have a mostly white surface to point your camera at you should be all set (ideally it works if the surface is just slightly gray). Once again, the actual procedure is going to be different on every camera, and if you’re unsure do an internet search of your camera model and “custom white balance.” You should find the information you need.

Sharpening

While you adjust White Balance for various photography situations, Sharpening is a setting that you fine-tune to your taste and leave as-is. Of course, each photographer is different, but I’ve found I like a certain level of sharpening on all my JPG photos. This is because I have a particular type of look that I’m trying to achieve. Sharpening can’t fix an out-of-focus image. However, it can give your photos a certain level of pizzazz or clarity that you might have seen in other pictures but aren’t quite sure how to achieve on your own.

I ramped up the in-camera sharpening to get a clean, crisp image of these crayons. The foreground and background are just slightly out of focus due to shallow depth of field, but the middle is tack sharp.

Be careful not to set the sharpening too high though. Over-sharpening can lead to images that look fake and over-processed. However, you might find that with a few tweaks to the sharpening setting you can get your images to look much better.

Contrast

Adjusting the contrast slider can make dull images come to life and punch-up an otherwise boring image. Either you or your camera, depending on your shooting mode, makes decisions about how bright or dark your images are based on the exposure settings. The contrast becomes the overall difference between the brightest and darkest portions of your pictures. Dialing up the contrast makes bright parts brighter and dark parts darker, whereas lowering the value will have the opposite effect.

Adjusting the contrast value helped me get the shot I was aiming for.

Contrast may seem like such a simple thing and, for the most part, it is. But it’s something that often gets overlooked by casual photographers. They may want to have nice JPEG shots straight out of their cameras and not worry about fussing with all the technical details. You might find that you prefer your photos to have a little contrast lending an interesting dynamic element to them. Or, perhaps you want your images to be a bit more subdued. Try adjusting the contrast slider, and you might realize that it does the sort of thing you have always been trying to achieve but never quite knew how to get.

Saturation

If you have ever played around with filters on apps like Instagram you probably noticed that some of them make your colors pop and stand out while others have more subdued, muted tones. This effect is due in large (but not exclusive) part to saturation adjustments. You can fine-tune this on your camera to customize the look of your images. Some photographers prefer an over-saturated look – especially when taking nature or landscape pictures. It also works well for certain types of portraits too.

Adjusting your saturation after you take a picture can work, but it’s best to get it right in camera if possible.

Some photographers like a softer touch and prefer their JPEG files to be less saturated for a calm, timeless look. It’s all based on personal preference of the photographer. It can be useful and time-saving to change the saturation in-camera instead of in an image editing program. Adjusting the saturation is as simple as increasing or decreasing the value in your camera. You may find, after several test shots, that you prefer your images to be somewhat over or under-saturated. Either way, it’s worth giving it a try to see what you end up liking.

Other settings

Most cameras have additional custom settings you can change in addition to the basic ones covered so far. They can include things like film simulations, grain effects, highlight/shadow adjustments, and noise reduction, which can be very handy when shooting at higher ISO levels. If you have never explored these settings before, it’s a good idea to dive into your camera menus and do some experimenting.

If you dig into your camera menus you will find many other settings you can change to get just the right look you are going for.

Change some numbers, take some test shots, and see how the results compare to your normal shooting mode. It’s a good bet that you’ll end up with some appealing results. At the very least, you may learn more about your camera than you did before.

Custom Banks

A feature offered by many cameras is the ability to save banks of custom settings you can activate at will. Even my old Nikon D200, which came out in 2006, had this ability. The same is also true for every camera I own today. You can save specific values of most of your image adjustments such as Saturation and Contrast to a bank that you can recall at will. Using these custom settings means you don’t have to change individual values every time you want to shoot with a specific style.

This Fuji X100F has seven custom banks where you can save a huge variety of settings. You can switch between each bank with the touch of a button.

Think of this method as creating custom presets in Lightroom that you can apply to your camera with the touch of a button. If you’re shooting outdoors, you may have an in-camera preset with greater saturation and contrast. Perhaps you find yourself shooting school basketball games, so you create a preset with custom white balance and sharpening levels. If your camera does offer this feature, you can find it in the menus, or you can search online for your camera as well as the phrase “custom setting bank.”

Wrap up

I know not everyone shoots in JPEG, but if you do, some of these custom settings can come in handy and save you a lot of time. However, be aware that it’s difficult to undo them afterward. Unlike RAW, your JPEG files contain much less wiggle room and if you crank up the saturation and contrast in your camera, it’s challenging to undo these changes on your computer. Still, if you pay attention to what you are doing and make your adjustments carefully, you might be surprised at how useful these settings can be.

The post Secret Camera Settings that Supercharge your JPEG Photos appeared first on Digital Photography School. It was authored by Simon Ringsmuth.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on Secret Camera Settings that Supercharge your JPEG Photos

Posted in Photography

 

How All JPEG Images are Cobbled at Birth

02 Jul

Everybody knows that JPEG images are prone to compression artifacts. Meaning every time an image is opened (whether altered or not) and re-saved, the tonal structure of the photo is recompressed using the same destructive process. File recompression always causes additional detail to be lost. Every time a JPEG image is adjusted in any way, those original 256 levels of color are redistributed and detail is lost.

Watchtower Full

Watchtower JPEG - All JPEG Images Are Cobbled At Birth

JPEG files offer various levels of file compression and repeated editing and saving causes further degradation.

But, that’s the least of the JPEG limitations.

First of all, JPEG is an old format originally designed for a long-past era. A group of photographic experts (Joint Photographic Experts Group) was assembled in 1986 for the single purpose of whittling down very large image file sizes:

  1. To display on old CRT (Cathode Ray Tube) computer monitors – basically old TV sets without the channel tuners
  2. To travel efficiently over the fledgling (slow) Internet, which was designed to accommodate the best broadcast television standards
  3. In order to compress them for size and portability. The first JPEG specification was released in 1992 and ratified again in 1994.

Now over 25 years later, the same format is still in use!

The Price of the Program

Many elements of a digital image get altered with JPEG file compression. True, massive amounts of disk real estate get saved in the process but significant other parts of the image get thrown away.

First, the full RGB signal is converted to an abbreviated color space used for analog TV, called YCbCr. CRT displays are driven by red, green, and blue voltage signals, but storing RGB signals involves redundant data. While most of the luminance (brightness) information (Y channel) is retained, the two color channels (red and blue) are significantly reduced in scope.

JPEG Nassau - Why All JPEG Images Are Cobbled At Birth

Highlights clipped in the JPEG process are still present in the RAW file.

An original RGB camera image (TIFF, PSD) contains massive levels of color; many of which the human eye cannot distinguish. Since the end goal of JPEG is zero-body-fat, once a base interpretation of the image is defined, and the 256 colors identified, almost all the “extra” colors are removed, leaving a mere skeleton of the color range.

Colors are characterized as bit depth; the number of tiny measured steps between full color and no color. Humans can only perceive 200 levels of each color under ideal lighting.

The Problem

The decision on what colors get eliminated is pre-designated by a cookie cutter JPEG template, rather than by the human evaluation of each image’s tonal structure. JPEG restricts the color for all images indiscriminately. One template fits all. Excess information is discarded.

Basically, JPEG compression is like weight loss by body part elimination rather than fat reduction; more of an amputation than a diet. As I’ll explain later, the production of a JPEG file is the ideal final format, but not the most ideal for image editing.

JPEG makes use of a basic human sight limitation. We can see tonality more than we identify individual colors. This is why we see only shapes in low lighting conditions. Basic luminosity is retained with JPEGs but much of the color is down-sampled.

The next multistage high-math transformations in this process get mind-boggling very quickly, so let’s just say that some very intricate 8×8 pixel matrix calculations take place based on the limitations of visual perception. True optical illusionary voodoo is at work to further reduce the “weight” of each image. The vulnerability in this mass weight loss program is that JPEG colors are weakest in the highlights and can display nasty artifacts when the images are re-saved. All those compression calculations take place again when JPEG images are re-saved.

JPEG Clouds - Why All JPEG Images Are Cobbled At Birth

The basis of JPEG compression involves a complicated formulation involving blocks of 8 pixels. The values of each block are quantized and distilled into similar colors to eliminate color variations that the human eye has trouble distinguishing.

JPEG files typically reduce the size 90% from the original PSD or TIFF file with little perceptible loss in image quality, as long as the file remains unchanged in size and content. Images that contain significant areas of similar tones (skies, building surfaces, etc.) benefit most from this file compression format.

Quantization

This JPEG standard is not an image resolution issue as must as it is a color depth issue. The number of pixels is not reduced, but the number of colors is. The “pixelated” appearance is not caused by a reduced number of pixels, but a reduction of the color quality of those pixels. The visible loss comes from changes to the initial 8×8 pixel matrix when the edited file is re-saved.

In 1992 it was unthinkable to produce images at a higher quality than TVs could broadcast, including the 256-tone limitation and the sRGB color gamut. In 1992, this was state-of-the-art stuff and it served the industry well for many years.

14-bit sensors can capture 16,000 levels of color in each RGB channel.

But then Silicon Valley developed camera image sensors and processors that could handle more than 8-bit images. That meant that digital manufacturers began building cameras whose images contained twice the level of color (10-bits, or 1000 levels of color).

Next, “deep-bit” images were accommodated by Adobe within Photoshop which changed everything. Much larger color spaces were developed to support this newly expanded color depth. (Keep in mind that bit depth is simply a way of dividing an image’s range into much smaller steps between zero color and full color of a pixel).

Deep (Color) Space

My friend Bruce Fraser (the father of color management) worked with Adobe to formulate what we know as Adobe RGB. Later a larger color space was developed called ColorMatch RGB. Even later, an even larger color space was developed and was labeled ProPhoto RGB. All three of these color spaces exceed the 256-level limitation of JPEG.

But even if an image is edited in one of these larger color spaces, when it is saved as a JPEG, it is automatically reduced to 8-bits (256-levels) per channel.

Bit depth is the measure of tones between full color and no color. JPEG images affect the image bit depth, not the image resolution, as commonly believed. Each time a JPEG file is re-saved, the color loss increases and the image clarity decreases.

Camera JPEGs

Camera-saved JPEG files are “shaped” by the camera settings in place when the image is captured. The algorithm applied to the image data harvested by the image sensor reflects the color model (sRGB, Adobe RGB, and ProPhoto RGB), sharpening preferences, etc.

A word about compression. Compression is probably not as accurate a term to describe JPEG limitations as it could be. Compression sounds like what your Aunt Martha does when she uses a girdle to compress herself into a smaller “container,” but that’s a totally different thing. When she is decompressed, all of Aunt Martha is still there.

JPEG uses “lossy” compression, which really means that some parts were discarded (or lopped off) for good. Aunt Martha only wishes her girdle would help her permanently “lose” something.

Think of image compression more like an abbreviation. When a JPEG file is saved to disk, the data captured by the camera’s image sensor gets compressed into a general mold, dictated by the color settings in the camera when the picture is taken.

Photo Finished

This JPEG process effectively plays the premature role of photofinisher, stamping out its own interpretation of the scene. What started out as a 4000-16,000 level per color image gets reduced to a 256-level picture with just a skeleton of color, leaving precious little room for tone (or color) adjustments.

JPEG March - Why All JPEG Images Are Cobbled At Birth

Both dark and light tones were clipped by the JPEG template but recovered from the RAW file.

JPEG Bit Depth Template - Why All JPEG Images Are Cobbled At Birth

JPEG limitations of 256 levels often clip brighter tones to white and darker tones to black prematurely (top grayscale above). RAW images allow the user to recover details that appear lost (bottom grayscale).

If the camera settings were not perfectly set to capture the brightness (bit depth) and contrast (tonal range) of the existing scene, the JPEG-rendered the photo leaves little room for recovery.

In the end, every image will be reduced to a 256-level file before it is either shared publicly or produced as a print. That’s just the nature of photography. There are very few printing devices that can reproduce more than 256 levels of color, and even if they could, the human eye couldn’t see those extra colors anyhow.

While digital cameras can capture up to trillions of colors, human eyesight recognizes less than 200 individual red, green, and blue colors.

JPEG Sufficiency?

So if we can’t see more than 200 different levels of each color (and JPEG provides 256, why do we need the billions captured as RAW files? Simple answer… those excess levels provide ample elbow room to push color levels and saturation into the most visually ideal 256 tones for printers to print and humans to observe. It’s all about optimizing detail.

JPEG Harbor - Why All JPEG Images Are Cobbled At Birth

The dynamic range of the beach scene exceeded the JPEG “template” and highlight detail appeared to be lost (left) but was retained in the RAW file (right).

Conclusion

So what can we take away from this?

First, JPEG is the most basic of photo file formats and is only ideal (as a camera file) when ALL the pre-capture lighting factors match the current camera settings. Second, it’s always best to set your camera to record both hi-level JPEG and RAW files as an insurance policy. And third, the unabridged image data saved as a RAW file enables the final JPEG to be shaped (as close as possible) to what your mind perceived when you clicked the shutter button.

JPEG is the digital file format you want to end up with but it is not always the one you want to start with. There is a waste factor involved in every manufacturing process, and digital imaging is no exception. It’s better to have too much than too little. Always start with more than you need.

Intend to lose the weight, but do it on your schedule.

The post How All JPEG Images are Cobbled at Birth appeared first on Digital Photography School.


Digital Photography School

 
Comments Off on How All JPEG Images are Cobbled at Birth

Posted in Photography