You always loose quality when saving as a JPEG, and every save iteration will make you loose some more.
Your best off saving as a TIFF or PSD
Quote:
Or do I have to save in the highest Quality (12? That will increase the file to 3,6 Mb. /Quote
If, for example, you have a situation where you save over a JPG with a higher quality setting than before, the size will balloon but no quality will be gained. It’s the way the file format works, I’m no fan of JPGs and use TIFF files whenever possible, or PSD if it’s a work-in-progress image. They work for emailing around the web and posting as previews, but people nowadays are switching to broadband and don’t mind waiting an extra 10 seconds to load an uncompressed image file (at least I certainly don’t).
I plan on archiving family history books with photographs in PDF on CD’s and DVD’s.
Is there a good chance that such disks can be recopied in whatever new protocols and hardware comes along without any loss of photo quality?
The alternative will also be used – photographic paper, protected as well as can be.
I am sanquine about the text surviving, but if the photographs must be recopied to a new file format say every 10 years will they not be degraded?
A better question is: With the present PDF can photos be copied over and over again in PDF without losing quality? best regards Hal
That’s digital. Bits/bytes are bits/bytes, those compilations of 1s and 0s don’t change. The media they are on might crap out, but as long as you have a viable version to copy from, the original and copy number 1 billion will be identical.
M
