Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

  1. #1

    Default Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    I know that Fine has a higher quality of image, but a very large (comparatively) file size. Is the extra file save justifiable for the minimal increase in quality?

  2. #2
    Moderator ortega's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Singapore, Singapore, Singapor
    Posts
    24,053
    Blog Entries
    7

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    if the image needs the fine detail quality then use fine
    for normal snap shots use normal

  3. #3

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    Unless you really nedd the space I'd reccommend saving in fine
    Furry Photos - Photography for the Modern Pet

  4. #4

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyterabyte View Post
    I know that Fine has a higher quality of image, but a very large (comparatively) file size. Is the extra file save justifiable for the minimal increase in quality?
    then why didn't you spend less money and buy a camera with lower resolution? File size will definately be smaller!
    deadpoet
    my portfolio

  5. #5

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyterabyte View Post
    I know that Fine has a higher quality of image, but a very large (comparatively) file size. Is the extra file save justifiable for the minimal increase in quality?
    If you know you would not blow that print up very big, then it's better to save in a lower resolution but with a fine JPEG compression. Although it's hard to see, the artifacts might be noticeable if you change the levels or perform some sharpening process later.

  6. #6

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    I usually shoot in fine cos I like to crop a lot. However it can consume a lot of space for me and I rapidly run out of space when I do AEB(Auto Exposure Bracketing). Sometimes I will carry my Digimate if I anticipate running out of space.

  7. #7

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyterabyte View Post
    I know that Fine has a higher quality of image, but a very large (comparatively) file size. Is the extra file save justifiable for the minimal increase in quality?
    "extra file save justifiable for the minimal increase in quality?"

    make sense... in this case it has to depend on the quality you want...

    now looking back at the 2 mega pixel images i've took a many few years back.. ermm.. well all i can say is they sure looks like images took many few years back...

  8. #8

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    dont scrimp on storage, use fine. unless you do not mind doing reshoots when the need for details surfaces.
    Canon 5D & 35L + Panasonic Lumix GX1 & 20mm
    Flickr | Buy Baobao's photobook!

  9. #9
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,759

    Default Re: Fine or Normal for JPEG Saving?

    Quote Originally Posted by jeremyterabyte View Post
    I know that Fine has a higher quality of image, but a very large (comparatively) file size. Is the extra file save justifiable for the minimal increase in quality?
    If you are complaining about this, man... then you haven't even tried the RAW format yet...

    But do save in the highest quality you can get away with. It really allows for future correction much better than when you save it at a lower res and lose the ability to boost such details when needed later.
    Michael Lim
    My Flickr Site

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •