Best format for scanned photos?

[NTB]

I would prefer a lossless format, even though that will take up more space. I would also like something that is program-independant and widely supported. Given these restrictions, right now I'm thinking either compressed TIFF or PNG. If anybody has any other suggestions though, let me know.

Nathan

 

[montypythizzle]

Blu-Ray.

 

[Heller]

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
Blu-Ray.

pfhhh.

beta max bitches!

 

[funkymatt]

^^sony fanbois

 

[toybuilder]

You're gonna be scanning these pictures at very high resolution with a good scanner, right? 300dpi with JPEG at very high quality will be effectively lossless if/when you reprint.

 

[NTB]

Originally posted by: toybuilder
You're gonna be scanning these pictures at very high resolution with a good scanner, right? 300dpi with JPEG at very high quality will be effectively lossless if/when you reprint.

True, but just from the few that I've looked at so far - these aren't my own photos; the box came from my mom and dad - a lot of them will likely need touching up before they're re-printed. Scanning is going to take long enough; I don't have time at the moment to re-touch them all, which is why I was leaning toward lossless compression.

Nathan

 

[Jeff7]

If you want lossless, it's going to take up a lot of space. PNG wasn't ever meant to compete with JPEG in terms of filesize.

If you do go that route though, I've found that the PNGOut plugin used with Irfanview gives very good compression for PNG files, and with Irfanview's batch function, you can run a whole slew of files through PNGOut with little effort on your part. It does have an upper limit on the filesize it can handle, though I'm not sure if this limitation is published anywhere. I haven't really bothered to look, either. Be warned though, it can take a long time to compress images, as it can make more than 10 passes per file; it determines the number of passes to make, or else you can specify a limit, though this can greatly affect its final compression ratio.

So do an initial save in your photo editing program, then set Irfanview to do a bunch of batch conversions, and go to bed. Make sure that PNGOut's box for Close Progress Bar When Done is checked, or else it'll just sit there idle when it finishes the first file.

 

[RESmonkey]

.tiiff ?

 

[Gothgar]

Originally posted by: montypythizzle
Blu-Ray.

haha, that's the first thing I thought of when I read the title.

 

[alkemyst]

you are going to have to look at how the scans came out regardless if they are worth saving.

Play with filetypes during this process and zoom in to see if it's 'good enough'.

 

[MegaVovaN]

IMO tiff is fine, as is PNG.

tiff is the format they use in printing industry...

 

[Safeway]

TIFF, PNG, PDF!

 

[MegaVovaN]

pdf?
hmmm

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: MegaVovaN
IMO tiff is fine, as is PNG.

tiff is the format they use in printing industry...

Which version?

 

[Mday]

lossless tiff works nicely.

 

[edro]

You don't really lose anything at high DPI .JPG.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Save it in 16 bit tiff. That way if you want to play around with the images, you have all the information current photo editor software can use. Storage is cheap, so why compromise memorable images for a few pennies?

 

[MegaVovaN]

Originally posted by: alkemyst

Originally posted by: MegaVovaN
IMO tiff is fine, as is PNG.

tiff is the format they use in printing industry...

Which version?

Don't know :shocked:
Modern/lossless, I suppose.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: edro
You don't really lose anything at high DPI .JPG.

I was under the impression that you lost something each time you opened it?

 

[BurnItDwn]

PNG is probably the best supported lossless image format.
Files will be about 5-10 times as big as if they were jpeg images, but you probably already know that.

 

[edro]

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: edro
You don't really lose anything at high DPI .JPEG.

I was under the impression that you lost something each time you opened it?

Myths and Facts about JPEG.

You lose something every time you open and then Re-Save it.
If your master copy is always kept, you won't have the loss problem.
I keep a master of every photo I take in .JPEG. If I want to edit it, I create a IMG1000_edit.JPEG.

 

[lucasorion]

If you use Photoshop, how about just keeping the original psd file that you scanned in as a background layer, then all the touchups above that on a duplicate layer.
This is what I do. Save to 8-10 quality jpg for emailing, etc. and keep the psds in case I want to go back and work on it some more, or save to another format.

 

[Safeway]

Originally posted by: edro

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: edro
You don't really lose anything at high DPI .JPEG.

I was under the impression that you lost something each time you opened it?

Myths and Facts about JPEG.

You lose something every time you open and then Re-Save it.
If your master copy is always kept, you won't have the loss problem.
I keep a master of every photo I take in .JPEG. If I want to edit it, I create a IMG1000_edit.JPEG.

I have never heard that myth before. Seems pretty unfounded.

 

[rivan]

Originally posted by: Safeway

Originally posted by: edro

Originally posted by: oldsmoboat

Originally posted by: edro
You don't really lose anything at high DPI .JPEG.

I was under the impression that you lost something each time you opened it?

Myths and Facts about JPEG.

You lose something every time you open and then Re-Save it.
If your master copy is always kept, you won't have the loss problem.
I keep a master of every photo I take in .JPEG. If I want to edit it, I create a IMG1000_edit.JPEG.

I have never heard that myth before. Seems pretty unfounded.

As the link mentions, if you EDIT the image, then resave, you're losing something. This will be true of any lossy compression.

As to the OP, use compressed TIFFs as an archival format. TIFF is better established and supported (though PNG is also well-supported, I expect TIFF support will linger longer.

High DPI, low compression (high quality, or whatever your encoder labels the setting) JPEGs aren't terrible, but there's no reason to use it at all if you don't have to for space reasons.

 

[ranmaniac]

Originally posted by: Mday
lossless tiff works nicely.