psd vs tif files
I did not upgrade to C1 version 10, largely because I did not see any new functionality that I thought was worth the cost, with the possible exception of psd processing. Version 9 worked well for me and I typically used tiff files for exporting to 3rd party editors.
However I have been wondering lately if there is any advantage in using psd files rather than tiff to send files to external editors and then to process the return files. I assume you can do this in version 10, but are psd files any better for external editing than tiff files? I use Affinity Photo as my (usual) 3rd party editor, but I am not sure that a 16 bit psd file is in any way better than a 16 bit tiff file. I just do not know and would appreciate any information.
However I have been wondering lately if there is any advantage in using psd files rather than tiff to send files to external editors and then to process the return files. I assume you can do this in version 10, but are psd files any better for external editing than tiff files? I use Affinity Photo as my (usual) 3rd party editor, but I am not sure that a 16 bit psd file is in any way better than a 16 bit tiff file. I just do not know and would appreciate any information.
0
-
Many retouchers use Capture One. If yours do, the optimum would be to send them a .eip instead. That contains the raw file, and any CO adjustments made to it, but in meta-data form, so completely non-destructive.
With regards to difference between PSD and TIFF, there there is practically none.0 -
There are a few reasons to use tiff over psd when processing and saving your retouched files in Ps. While they do have virtually the same feature set, psd is severely limited by their 2gb file size limit, something that so many of today's layered files exceed. Tiff goes to 4 gb, which is limiting in itself but not as much as psd, but tiff also has the option to use zip compression on both layers and background layer which is slower that psd's compression but does result in smaller files - or you can also save the tiff with no compression at all. The ONLY reason to ever use psd in my experience is if you're printing true duotone, tritones, or quadtones on a real printing press. All of which makes you wonder why Phase chose to support layered psd instead of layered tiffs, which make way more sense in my mind.
As far as the eip files, I am both a photographer and a high end retoucher and I shoot into C1, process tiffs which are then worked like hell in Ps - things that C1 could dream of doing and really can't see why this would be a thing but maybe for some it works. I mean, once I process the tiff from the raw I never would use C1 on that file again unless I needed, for some reason to re-process that file.0 -
Thank you for the replies.
What comes through is that tiffs are not in any way an inferior format to psd and so I can continue to use tiffs instead of psds without worrying that I might be making a mistake.0 -
Just to avoid any stupid mistakes, you should be aware that it IS possible to save a tiff file with jpeg compression on the background layer, but no one ever does that on purpose. That would be the only time a tiff would be inferior. And really, the only compression you should use is zip or none at all. You can choose RLE or LZW compression as well. RLE is what psd files use as far as I know and LZW can actually make larger files than no compression if you've got a 12 bit file padded out to 16 bits the way many digital camera files are and many scanner files too.
Just out of curiosity, it sounds like someone has told you there was something inferior about tiff vs psd. What did you hear and where did you hear it.0
投稿コメントは受け付けていません。
コメント
4件のコメント