Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Full headers:
X-Received: by with SMTP id v63mr12486613qkb.60.1509330551769;
Sun, 29 Oct 2017 19:29:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: PeterN <"peter,newdelete">
Subject: Re: A lightroom question
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2017 22:28:06 -0400
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <>
References: <>
<> <ot5giq$1mtk$>
Mime-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101
In-Reply-To: <ot5giq$1mtk$>
X-Received-Bytes: 2627
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2491286496
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Language: en-US
Print Article
Forward Article
On 10/29/2017 5:17 PM, Mayayana wrote:
> "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
> option?
>    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.

Yes. But I was responding to the situation where there already are JPEGs.