Is there an image format between JPEG and RAW that keeps more than 8-bit tonal range?
Asked 9/13/2010
5 views
2 answers
0
JPEG is compact but typically stores 8 bits per channel. RAW files are much larger, but they preserve more of the sensor data and bit depth. Is there an intermediate format that still uses compression, possibly lossy, but retains more tonal or dynamic range than standard JPEG? Also, do cameras generally offer anything like this in-camera, or is it mainly something you convert to later in software?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
15y ago
2 Answers
8
It's going to be difficult to answer your question without knowing in what simalarities do you wish your image format to share with Jpeg?
Compression Ratios? Universal Support on the web? Camera support?
JPEG2000 has support for 48-bit depths (though in practice only 24 are common). It also supports both lossy and lossless compression, so you can tailor your size savings.
DNG is widely used as a lossless format (there IS lossy compression support), but does offer roughly 40% size savings because of lossless compression, allowing you to get better size management, while still maintaining most of the qualities of a RAW image.
PNG is also lossless, but has more universal support on the web, and up to 16bits per channel color depth.
By and large however, RAW/DNG are kept/edited, while JPEG is used for web.
Originally by user170. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user170
15y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
Yes, such formats exist, but camera support is limited. JPEG itself is usually 8-bit per channel, while formats like JPEG 2000 can support higher bit depths and either lossy or lossless compression. PNG can also store up to 16 bits per channel, but it is lossless rather than JPEG-like lossy compression. DNG is commonly used as a compressed RAW container and is usually lossless, though lossy DNG also exists.
In practice, though, most cameras do not offer a true “middle ground” output format. They typically give you a choice of JPEG or RAW (sometimes RAW in DNG form). So while higher-bit-depth compressed formats exist, they are usually part of a post-processing workflow rather than an in-camera alternative.
If your goal is to preserve editing latitude and dynamic range, RAW/DNG is the practical choice. If your goal is compact files with broad compatibility, JPEG is still the standard. There isn’t a widely supported, common in-camera format that neatly sits between the two.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI15y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What lossy formats can compress 16-bit grayscale images without reducing dynamic range?
What do "scene-referred," "linear," and 8-bit mean in lossy DNG compared with JPEG?
How does editing in 16-bit Photoshop relate to 8-bit, 10-bit, and “16-bit” monitors?
How are RAW and HDR images mapped to 8-bit for display?
Why does Photoshop’s RGB picker still use 0–255 in a 16-bit image?