Photos

[eddy long]

Using:
Gateway PC
MS Win 98
--------------------------

Hello all,
I am thinking of submitting some digital images for publication.

Many publishers say that they "accept images in digital format *for Mac*".

I usually save my images as .jpg or .gif files.

What difference does it make as far as viewing the images that I submit for
a Mac versus a PC since I use a PC?

Thanking all in advance.
Eddy

 

[Travis Newbury]

Many publishers say that they "accept images in digital format *for Mac*".
I usually save my images as .jpg or .gif files.
What difference does it make as far as viewing the images that I submit for
a Mac versus a PC since I use a PC?

Submission for what? For publication in a magazine? For a Website?
Makes a HUGE difference as to what you need to submit. Most magazine
publishers will not except JPGs and will want TIFs, raw, or some other
non degrading format.. JPG's degrade every time you same them. TIF
(and several other formats) don't.

 

[dorayme]

Hello all,
I am thinking of submitting some digital images for publication.

Many publishers say that they "accept images in digital format *for Mac*".

I usually save my images as .jpg or .gif files.

What difference does it make as far as viewing the images that I submit for
a Mac versus a PC since I use a PC?

If you are preparing TIFFs, you might notice when saving them that there are
options to do with "Macintosh" or "IBM PC". They have different byte orders.
What I do for printing jobs is submit both because I am not always sure what
platform the printer use. If I am pressed I choose PC because Macs usually
can handle more (because they have to) but PCs can't (because they don't
have to). In your case, you know they want for Mac.

jpgs and gifs are these two platform independent and you need not worry...

dorayme

 

[Blinky the Shark]

Per Travis Newbury:

Is that to say that most commercial photographers have their cameras set to save
TIFF or RAW?.... or do the save in JPEG and then change to .TIFF in PhotoShop
or something?

I'd say RAW/TIF. No loss. Why bastardize their originals, and later
convert the bastardized originals to a loss-free format just to
preserve the original bastardization?

 

[Dennis]

On 25 Jun 2005 Blinky the Shark wrote in alt.html

I'd say RAW/TIF. No loss. Why bastardize their originals, and later
convert the bastardized originals to a loss-free format just to
preserve the original bastardization?

Wouldn't want to loose a good bastard.

 

[Blinky the Shark]

On 25 Jun 2005 Blinky the Shark wrote in alt.html

Wouldn't want to loose a good bastard.

Oh, I dunno. They're a dime a dozen.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Travis Newbury:

Most magazine
publishers will not except JPGs and will want TIFs, raw, or some other
non degrading format.

Is that to say that most commercial photographers have their cameras set to save
TIFF or RAW?.... or do the save in JPEG and then change to .TIFF in PhotoShop
or something?

 

[Andy Dingley]

I am thinking of submitting some digital images for publication.

Send a trivial (but full quality) sample to your publisher and see if
they can read it and if they're happy with it.

Many publishers say that they "accept images in digital format *for Mac*".

This is because they're fluffy little bunnies who use Macs. They know
that PCs and Macs have compatibility issues, but they don't realise that
image files have different compatibility issues from these.

"Image files in Mac format" is basically meaningless.

What difference does it make as far as viewing the images that I submit for
a Mac versus a PC since I use a PC?

Not much. Unless you do something particularly obscure, then they're
compatible.

Use JPEGs, and use them as big and raw as you can get them from the
camera. We all have bandwidth these days and the post production people
at the magazine would _much_ rather reduce something big than try to
blend away pixels.

JPEGs do _not_ have quality issues unless you put them in yourself.
Excessive compression on storage, or repeatedly re-encoding them will
cause trouble, but a simple one-off save from any competent vaguely
modern piece of kit will work fine.

Avoids TIFFs. TIFF is a nasty format, full of all sorts of variables and
optional features. It's about the only graphic format around where you
can still generate a compatibility problem.

 

[Travis Newbury]

Per Travis Newbury:

Is that to say that most commercial photographers have their cameras set to save
TIFF or RAW?.... or do the save in JPEG and then change to .TIFF in PhotoShop
or something?

Everyone that I know of uses camera raw, then imports to PS. All
professional digital cameras have the ability to save your images in raw
or jpg. Most have tiff too. (I personally use a Canon EOS 350D which
does not support tiff)

 

[Travis Newbury]

I've never used a professional-grade camera, but the excessive time between
shots for .TIFF on my Nikon 950 made me think it would be impractical. But now
I see that SLRs can to burst mode of 4-5 frames/sec for quite a few seconds ....
So I'd guess there's some serious memory buffering going on there...

The EOS 350D has 3/4 frames/second RAW+Large JPG (it saves 2 images at
the same time) for up to 14 frames. The resetting after 14 frames is
directly related to the media speed. I also had to get an 80gig external
HD just to hold the images. Shooting 4 gig of images in one sitting is
not unusual. When it costs you nothing to shoot, you shoot a lot.

Saving both Raw and JPG is great as I can download and view the much
smaller JPG (3-4meg compared to 12+meg for a RAW image) Images I want to
keep I download the RAW.

 

[(PeteCresswell)]

Per Blinky the Shark:

Why bastardize their originals, and later
convert the bastardized originals to a loss-free format just to
preserve the original bastardization?

I've never used a professional-grade camera, but the excessive time between
shots for .TIFF on my Nikon 950 made me think it would be impractical. But now
I see that SLRs can to burst mode of 4-5 frames/sec for quite a few seconds ....
So I'd guess there's some serious memory buffering going on there...

 

[dorayme]

Avoids TIFFs. TIFF is a nasty format, full of all sorts of variables and
optional features. It's about the only graphic format around where you
can still generate a compatibility problem.

Oh, I dunno, it's not a bad format, it is not nasty, many printers like it
and it even admits compression of a non lossy kind. If you do send in TIFF
format, see my last post on this...

dorayme