8 Bit or 16 Bit TIFFs, your preference?

[Marcel]

Which do you save your images in? (Im talking your TIFFs for backup etc, once processed).

Do you do certain corrections in 16 bit, then convert to 8bit for storage?

 

[Grendel]

I don't bother with 16 bit any more. I used to convert from RAW to 16 bit TIFF but after a while I realised that I couldn't find any difference in IQ that justified double the file size :shrug: So I only save 8 bit TIFFs now

 

[Marcel]

Thanks Paul, that's exactly the sort of answer I'm looking for
I'm trying to justify the extra file size myself TBH.

I've just gone through alot of my processed images and flattened them. I usually save with layers, but minor levels adjustments etc, cloning and healing layers etc, there's really no point in keeping them separate, not when I have the raws too.

Most of my saved TIFFs are 48Mb each now, which is still quite large, but much smaller than the 100-250mb sizes they were.
If I convert them to 8 bit, then they'll end up 26 meg ish.

 

[Grendel]

Yup, completely agree mate I've done 100% crop tests, print tests on my printer, photo labs and my own kit at work and honestly can't see any reduction in IQ in an 8 bit TIFF. I'm about the same in my TIFFs being around the 40-50Mb mark. That's big enough for me

I keep the original RAW, layered PS file, Hi res (8 bit) TIFF and a low res JPG. I find that way I have ultimate flexibility to go back and tweak again if I want to. Although I have to say, I almost never refer back to the layered PS file and am seriously considering not keeping them any more.

 

[Marcel]

I used to do the same I would keep

The original RAW
A RAW processed, 8 bit TIFF (No PS work done....straight out of the RAW)
A processed, layered, 16 BIT TIFF
Low res 700px bordered, sharpened JPEG.

I've since gotten rid of the backup 8 bit TIFF, and I'm trying to squeeze down the processed TIFFS. I did toy with the idea of saving as PSD's instead, but chose TIFF for ultimate future compatibility (just incase), and also there were no file size savings.

What about the layered PS file? Does that include minor tweak adjustments? Or just major stuff? I've been through one 'year' in my photo catalogue and flattened them all, taking 13 gig off the overall folder size, except for those with major adjustments. (Eyes, brushwork etc)

 

[maddog.mark]

This photo editing is complicted stuff isn't it.

I keep the original raw and the processed Tiff (usually 8 bit, unless I've been at the HDR again in which they tend to be 16bit). I flatten them all unless I'm still working on them.

I tend not to go back to image once I've processed it, tweaked after C&C from the good folks here etc. But by keeping the RAW I can start all over again if I want to at a much later date.

 

[Dangleman]

This is why I absolutely love lightroom. I shoot in raw, and just store the raws. Lightroom is non destructible editing and saves all your pp edits by techno wizardy in xml files which are stored in the lightroom catalog (I think this is how it does it anyway).
So, if you look at your images in lightroom it will display up to yout most recent edit, but the image contains the entire 'history' of changes, and you can flick back to the 'original' at the click of a mouse.

Then just make sure you back up your lightroom catalogs to a seperate hard drive, like we all do with our photos (I hope!) and you're sorted. No messing around with different file formats, and saves a load of drive space.

Works for me anyway, and no I don't work for Adobe.

 

[Grendel]

................What about the layered PS file? Does that include minor tweak adjustments? Or just major stuff?

*usually* I will do WB adjustment and tweak exposure if necessary in RAW and not a lot else. Most of my editing is done in PS so the layered files include pretty much all the corrective work I do. I think that's the main reason I've always been reluctant to bin the PS file once I've saved a hi res TIFF. A security blanket I guess :shrug:

...........I tend not to go back to image once I've processed it, tweaked after C&C from the good folks here etc. But by keeping the RAW I can start all over again if I want to at a much later date.

I think that's the major point for me Mark. I agree with you that, in reality, I almost never go back and re-edit a photo once I know I'm happy with it, so I'm saving gigs worth of PS files perhaps unnecessarily . Worst case scenario is that you can go back to the original RAW and start again if you had to. As I said above, it's just about throwing away the security blanket

 

[Marcel]

And thats exactly why I keep them. Security blanket too.

 

[reddeathdrinker]

I keep the unadjusted RAW files, plus any conversions to JPEG I've done. I keep PSD files for work-in-progress, but once they're done, they're binned....