Work Flow - TIFFS or PSDs

[lostmysnorkel]

As an aside to the 'Work Flow' thread....

I noticed the popularity of TIFF files for processing/tweaking in. Why is this the best format?

I have a friend who does a lot of graphic work who prefers to use PSDs when 'in' Photoshop, because the files aren't compressed at all. He prefers this to the TIFF files lossless compression. I think his attitude is 'Any kind of compression should be avoided'.

So, the question to the floor is, what file format do you use, and why, between the RAW 'input' and the jpeg 'output to lab' for printing?

[Matt Needham]

For most of my weddings and portrait work I go straight from raw to 8 bit jpeg. As long as my exposures are good, and I'm not doing anything too fancy (color correction and sharpening, maybe minor cropping and burning), saving it as a jpeg once or twice isn't going to affect quality in any noticable way, but it will save me time.

If I'm working on something I intend to tweak quite a bit or print really large I'll start with a 16 bit tiff from the raw file. Once I open that tiff in PS I save it as a psd file until I'm finished working on it. Only saving the finished file as a tiff or jpeg.

I've been using the free RAW Shooters Essentials 2005 raw editor which only has output of jpeg or tiff. Does Adobe Bridge allow you to go from raw to psd?

[Choogster]

clients require TIFF as its uncompressed and highest quality along with being easy to manipulate and supported by the majority of applications.

[lostmysnorkel]

MATT - Certainly the version of Camera RAW with CS2 allows you to save out in most of the formats available in PShop.

I realise that many clients would want files supplied as either TIFF or jPeg - I was just wondering whether anyone preferred using other formats for the post-production process.

[tonymidd]

I do as much pp on the RAW file as I can in Nikon Cature4.4 and then save as unsharpened 16 bit tiffs on a disk.
I see no point in shooting RAW and saving as an 8bit lossy jpeg, it's a bit like shooting 5"x4" and sending the film to Happysnaps to be machine processed and printed.
There is a school of thought that says working in PS in PSD files is better but I find using uncompressed tiffs just as good and I don't have to convert them into a universal format.
Tiffs and jpegs can be read by both PC and Mac's in virtually any imaging programme, PSD files can only be read in a few programmes, PS and Irfanview spring to mind.

[Matt Needham]

I see no point in shooting RAW and saving as an 8bit lossy jpeg, it's a bit like shooting 5"x4" and sending the film to Happysnaps to be machine processed and printed.

I understand the advantages to using 16 bit tiffs instead of 8 bit jpegs, but there is a difference between creating an image using the very best techniques possible, and creating the best final product for your client. Every pro lab ( I'm not going to Happysnaps :) ) I use wants 8 bit files. If I give them 16 bit files they will either do the conversion themselves, or call me and tell me to provide 8 bit files. I have noticed that many places convert my tiffs into jpegs for printing, so I might as well deliver jpegs. I have only ever had one client in all of my commercial, portrait, or wedding work ever request tiffs. They all want jpegs. Many of my commercial clients don't even want high res jpgs; they want the smallest file that will get the job done so it's easy and fast to email. The point of saving as an 8 bit jpeg is to speed up post-processing and provide the customer with what they want.

For any work that is going to require much manipulation I do usually work in 16 bit tiff, but if all I'm doing is fairly simple corrections like color correction and sharpening then an 8 bit jpeg will do the job just fine. Yes, it's possible to wreck a jpeg by repeatedly saving it, but you won't see it until you get to 6+ saves, and it'll still be slight. I'm saving it twice.

I also don't like storing 24+ mb, 16 bit tiffs if I don't have to. I always keep the raw file, and can go back to it at any time and make a 16 bit tiff if I need it. If I keep the raw, a 16 bit tiff, and the 8 bit jpeg neccessary for my client that's 35+ mb per photograph. I racked up 12,000 digital wedding photos in just half of 2005; at 35 mb each that's 420 gb of space before I back it up. Without the 16 bit tiff it's a third of that.

Many of the advantages of shooting raw still apply no matter what the final output is: jpeg, tiff, prints, web, TV, brochure, etc...