Go Back   PCMech Forums > Help & Discussion > Software Discussion & Support

Need Some Help? Type Your Keywords Here:

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 12-30-2005, 12:38 PM   #1
Member (12 bit)
 
Kov-Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
Send a message via ICQ to Kov-Ice Send a message via MSN to Kov-Ice
Imaging - Lossy File Formats

I know JPG files are lossy, meaning that when they are opened and closed they lose file info. Simply moving the file from place to place doesn't change the file compression in any way, tho, right?

What about video files? I think I read MPEG is a lossy format as well. Is that true of AVI files?
__________________
Kov

Are You Foldin'?
Join PCMech's Folding@Home Team and Help Save Lives! Click Here!
Kov-Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 12:44 PM   #2
Professional gadfly
 
doctorgonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 6,364
Send a message via MSN to doctorgonzo
AVI is apparently a container format, not an actual compression format. AVI files can contain video encoded in many different ways, lossy and lossless. MPEG is lossy.

Moving JPGs won't affect quality, nor will simply opening them. Editing may degrade quality, depending on the program you use to edit them. I've heard that the effect of "bit rot" on JPG files is exaggerated in real life.
doctorgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 12:55 PM   #3
RJ
Member (14 bit)
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Offenbach/Main (Germany)
Posts: 8,485
Send a message via ICQ to RJ
Yep, AVI is only a container. The video inside can be encoded using many different codecs.

For example Huffyuv, it's a lossless codec. MJPEG is also lossy. . you can compare it to JPEG. Every frame in the MJPEG is a JPEG, hence the name.
DV is also a lossy codec.
And DivX, XVid etc. derive all from MPEG-4, they're all lossy codecs as well.

Though DV and MJPEG are lossy, they are far less lossy than a typical MPEG, for example.

RJ
__________________
All's right with the world when your PC is working right.
RJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 01:45 PM   #4
Member (12 bit)
 
Kov-Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
Send a message via ICQ to Kov-Ice Send a message via MSN to Kov-Ice
On JPGs, I was looking through a Photoshop book I got as a gift, and the author alludes to this problem. Opening, editing, and closing multiple times means multiple compressions. I guess that leads to loss of image quality and pixelation. He suggests converting to TIFF files and editing from there, as they are lossless.

Here's a Photoshop sidenote... When I save as JPG in Photoshop, the Save As box shows up with a compression slide bar. They can be save from 1-12 on the scale, with 12 being Maximum Quality. Saving at 10 keeps the file size very close to the original. However, when I save a 2.5MB pic on 11 or 12 on the scale, my file size becomes larger than the original. Why is that, and what's the better choice for best quality?
Kov-Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 01:51 PM   #5
Professional gadfly
 
doctorgonzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 6,364
Send a message via MSN to doctorgonzo
Saving it in a lossless format is a good idea if you are going to be doing a lot of editing. I store all my pictures in PNG format.

I'm not sure why the file would be larger than the original when you save as an 11 or 12. The best choice for quality is up to you, but 9 or 10 sounds right.
doctorgonzo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 02:33 PM   #6
Staff
Premium Member
 
mairving's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Arlington, TN
Posts: 5,538
I usually save as PSD's for another reason. That is it doesn't flatten the layers which makes for easy editing.
__________________

Want to Make $$$$ with your Computer? No Risk! Simply press shift-4 four times in a row
mairving is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 02:47 PM   #7
Premium Member
 
Statica's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Posts: 9,231
While on the subject of Photoshop, I wish the JPEG 2000 file format would get more popular; it's a very good format that has the ability to be lossless or lossy.
Statica is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2005, 03:41 PM   #8
Member (12 bit)
 
Kov-Ice's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: St. Louis, Missouri
Posts: 3,294
Send a message via ICQ to Kov-Ice Send a message via MSN to Kov-Ice
I normally save it at the 10 level, as I just felt like adding to the size of the file couldn't possibly improve quality.

Preserving the layers with PSD files is fine while editing, but as for storing photos long-term, I figure JPG is the choice. It's as standard as file types get, I suppose.

HERE is a neat little JPEG 2000 comparison, btw.
Kov-Ice is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Still Need Help? Type Your Keywords Here:


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 06:33 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2