From: Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Full headers:
From: "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam>
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 17:17:24 -0400
Organization: NNTP Server
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <ot5giq$1mtk$>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5512
X-Priority: 3
Print Article
Forward Article
"PeterN" <"peter,newdelete"> wrote

| I would think that in most cases, editing a JPEG file in LR should not
| make any difference, because you are only changing the instructions, not
| working on the file itself. No matter how many times you edit the file,
| there will only be one change,and that will be when you save it.
| each additional edit will be on another copy of the file.
| <>

    He's a bit evasive, focussing on how you can
make edits and save them as memory in LR. What
you say matches his description. That's fine, but if
you edit a JPG you eventually have to save it again
and that's going to degrade it. No way around that.
"Only one change" is one change too many if it wasn't
necessary. If you work with them in LR as
TIFs and never deal with JPG except to save for
some target that requires JPG, isn't that the best
  In other words, why not RAW -> TIF  and then
only save to JPG if you have to for the sake of size
or recipient limitations? JPG shouldn't be thought of
as a storage format. It's only used for photos
because it's universal and most people don't edit.
It's *not* used because it's an appropriate format.