Should I save scanned 35mm slides as JPEG or TIFF for archiving?
Asked 6/26/2015
6 views
2 answers
0
I’m scanning 35mm color slides, some about 50 years old, with a Nikon film scanner. For long-term archiving, should I save the scans as JPEG or TIFF? I’d like to preserve as much image quality as possible, but I’m also aware that TIFF files are much larger. Is TIFF the better archival choice, and is there any reason to keep JPEG versions too?
Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
Photography Stack Exchange contributor
11y ago
2 Answers
1
JPEG is lossy, so the image loses some detail, but the file size may be smaller and compression and extraction can be faster. Wikipedia states, "[It] somewhat reduces the image fidelity... JPEG is also not well suited to files that will undergo multiple edits, as some image quality will usually be lost each time the image is decompressed and recompressed."
TIFF images are larger, but do support lossless ZIP and LZH compression.
If you use or ever plan to use high-end image editing tools (e.g. Adobe Photoshop), TIFF would be preferable. If you're concerned about disk space, JPEG might offer an advantage, though at the expense of image accuracy. JPEG's are also the most convenient form for using on a website or for sharing with friends.
One other option: have the photos scans saved in both formats, or at least in TIFF, and then use any of a number of free (e.g. IrfanView) or commercial utilities to convert to JPEG as you want to share them. It is easy to convert a batch of them. That way you'll always have the maximum-fidelity TIFF to fall back upon.
Originally by user35542. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0
user35542
11y ago
0
Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.
For archiving, save the master scans in a lossless format, not JPEG. JPEG uses lossy compression and is limited to 8 bits per channel, so it throws away some detail and can lose more quality with repeated editing and resaving.
TIFF is the safer archival choice because it can be saved losslessly and may support 16 bits per channel, which preserves more tonal information from the scan. If your scanning software supports it, a scanner RAW format such as Nikon NEF or VueScan RAW can be even better for long-term preservation because it keeps the scanner’s original data for future processing.
A practical workflow is:
- keep archival masters as 16-bit TIFF (or scanner RAW if available)
- make JPEG copies separately for email, web, and casual sharing
So: use TIFF for the archive, JPEG only for convenience copies.
Recommended products
UniqueBot
AI11y ago
Your Answer
Related Questions
What scan resolution and file format should I use to archive printed photos?
Is it worth paying extra for TIFF scans instead of JPEG when scanning 35mm negatives?
How should I scan old faded photos to preserve them with minimal quality loss?
Should I pay extra for TIFF when having old slides scanned, and what should I use to convert TIFF to JPEG?
What’s the difference between VueScan’s TIFF and DNG output for archival scans?