Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [genphoto] Two Questions: File Types and Images Save in Family Tree Maker

Expand Messages
  • E.Rodier
    Kaye, FTM up to version 5 accepted TIF/LZW. FTW 6 and later will accept uncompressed TIF but it is about ten times the file size for similar quality compared
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 8, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      Kaye,
      FTM up to version 5 accepted TIF/LZW. FTW 6 and later will accept
      uncompressed TIF but it is about ten times the file size for similar quality
      compared to a good JPG. Default JPG setting is usually for a small (lower
      quality) image. For any family project that involves sets of images,
      experiment to find the appropriate size. Pictures do not (usually) move from
      one genealogy program to another so that means keeping two separate
      databases to use reports and charts in both.

      Any method seems okay for a few images but might not expand to include all
      images available. One scrapbook has over 200 images from snapshot albums
      loaned by one person but other files have multiple scrapbooks for the same
      person with 500 individual pictures divided by topics & time periods.

      100 pictures used for experiments with genealogy software that links images
      are mostly 240 pixels high, good enough for small images in reports. Linked
      images and about 300 used in a word processor book project in July 2000 are
      organized separately from the Windows folders & sub-folders kept like a
      master copy for each branch of the family.

      Scan, edit, then save as JPG at the appropriate size (on the hard drive). I
      use 480-600 pixels for home page, scrapbook and slide shows. Anything larger
      is archival size and printed one page at a time. Digital camera has an
      option for 1600x1200 pixels, about 900 kb, always resized smaller for
      scrapbooks.

      Individual pictures printed full page with scanner software are sometimes
      printed from larger files using the editing format (not TIF or BMP) when
      captions are not needed.
      Elizabeth, estimated 15,000 family pictures organized in scrapbooks the last
      5 years

      > 1. What file type(s) do others recommend for image saving?
      > 2. For users of FTM, are you saving your images in FTM for use when you
      > create your family history book, or are you going to use images OUTSIDE of
      > FTM when you create your family history book?
    • Merv Leeding
      G day Kaye I have used TIF since starting scanning in 1988. It is the industry standard and has features that no other formats have. You may not be aware that
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 9, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        G'day Kaye

        I have used TIF since starting scanning in 1988. It is the industry
        standard and has features that no other formats have. You may not be aware
        that you can embed textual information in the file. The same is true of
        FlashPix but it is less developed and less used.

        Many users lack the ability to see the difference between TIF and JPG and
        of course a low-level printer will not show the difference. JPG has its
        value on screen and web of course but is a final stage format. Never use it
        when you are editing and saving files. And one area where JPG gives a lousy
        result is areas of broad colour. If you used it for a screen grab (eg part
        of the FTM screen) up to 50& of pixels will change colour on the first
        save, up to 90% on the second save. By "change colour" I meant light blue
        becoming lavender, pale yellow becoming olive etc. This is a well-known
        deficiency of JPG and in fairness to its creators, the format was designed
        specifically for photographs (the P stands for Photographic) and it works
        on removing information from a photograph that a typical viewer will not miss.

        FTM will load TIF files. In addition to the standard official TIF format
        there is a compressed form (referred to as LZW compression). Unfortunately
        around version 6 FTM dropped support for the compressed form apparently
        because of the high licensing fees. Other programs like Family Origins also
        lacks support for compressed TIF. The file size drops to about half with
        compression and is comparable to what you would get if you used WinZip on a
        TIF file.

        Mind you there is an exception. If you used compressed TIF with a screen
        dump then (1) you get none of the loss that JPG gives and (2) you get
        massive reduction in size, down to 10% and below in my experience, and as
        low as you get with the highest compression lowest quality JPG of the same
        file.

        Now it is unfortunate about FTM but worse are the programs that produce a
        compressed TIF (not an official standard) without telling the user. The
        chief offender is PaintShopPro and my guess is that you are using it.
        Photoshop alerts the user the existence of the compressed and uncompressed
        form every time you do a save. My friend Elizabeth Rodier is a great
        supporter of PaintShopPro and she was fooled by the removal of compressed
        TIF from FTM during the beta testing of that version whereas, as a
        Photoshop user, I knew immediately what had happened.

        You can create non-compressed TIF in PaintShopPro.

        Now the guy who told you to convert to JPG before importing into FTM was
        quite wrong. You should convert to uncompressed TIF first. The reason is
        that FTM converts to JPG for internal storage and if you first convert to
        JPG you do two JPG conversions leading to unnecessary further degradation.

        I don't worry with compressed TUF myself, partly because back in the late
        1980s not all programs supported it and not all could use a compressed file
        unless it was created by that specific program. I store my images on CD and
        a saving of 50% is not worth the hassle.

        One reason I don't like JPG is that there is no standard for users on the
        degree of compression. Photoshop uses a range of ten plus terms like
        Maximum, Good etc. PSP used to use a range of 0-75 and Corel PhotoPaint
        2-255. FTM uses yet another system. Some people say "maximum quality
        minimum compression" is no loss, while industry experts say there is a
        no-loss JPG but it is not available in any common program. One thing is
        certain. Once you create a JPG there is no way to ever know which of the
        above systems was used or, more importantly, where it was saved over the
        range of maximum to minimum quality. Very useful for screen and web but not
        in my view satisfactory for archival storage.

        Incidentally PCX and BMP will also preserve full quality but have about the
        same size as TIF and are not industry standards.

        Hope this helps even if it was not quite what you wanted to hear.























        Regards, Merv
      • Steve Cardinalli
        Merv, Sounds like you know what you are talking about. Just one question, what makes you such an expert in this area? Based on what you said, I m going to
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 9, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Merv,

          Sounds like you know what you are talking about. Just one question, what makes you such an expert in this area?

          Based on what you said, I'm going to look into saving all my "new" (anything that I can rescan or hasn't been scanned yet) images in a TIF format.

          Steve

          >To: genphoto@egroups.com
          >From: Merv Leeding <mleeding@...>
          >Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2001 09:43:46 +1100
          >Reply-To: genphoto@egroups.com
          >Subject: [genphoto] Images Save in Family Tree Maker
          >
          >G'day Kaye
          >
          >I have used TIF since starting scanning in 1988. It is the industry
          >standard and has features that no other formats have. You may not be aware
          >that you can embed textual information in the file. The same is true of
          >FlashPix but it is less developed and less used.
          >
          >Many users lack the ability to see the difference between TIF and JPG and
          >of course a low-level printer will not show the difference. JPG has its
          >value on screen and web of course but is a final stage format. Never use it
          >when you are editing and saving files. And one area where JPG gives a lousy
          >result is areas of broad colour. If you used it for a screen grab (eg part
          >of the FTM screen) up to 50& of pixels will change colour on the first
          >save, up to 90% on the second save. By "change colour" I meant light blue
          >becoming lavender, pale yellow becoming olive etc. This is a well-known
          >deficiency of JPG and in fairness to its creators, the format was designed
          >specifically for photographs (the P stands for Photographic) and it works
          >on removing information from a photograph that a typical viewer will not miss.
          >
          >FTM will load TIF files. In addition to the standard official TIF format
          >there is a compressed form (referred to as LZW compression). Unfortunately
          >around version 6 FTM dropped support for the compressed form apparently
          >because of the high licensing fees. Other programs like Family Origins also
          >lacks support for compressed TIF. The file size drops to about half with
          >compression and is comparable to what you would get if you used WinZip on a
          >TIF file.
          >
          >Mind you there is an exception. If you used compressed TIF with a screen
          >dump then (1) you get none of the loss that JPG gives and (2) you get
          >massive reduction in size, down to 10% and below in my experience, and as
          >low as you get with the highest compression lowest quality JPG of the same
          >file.
          >
          >Now it is unfortunate about FTM but worse are the programs that produce a
          >compressed TIF (not an official standard) without telling the user. The
          >chief offender is PaintShopPro and my guess is that you are using it.
          >Photoshop alerts the user the existence of the compressed and uncompressed
          >form every time you do a save. My friend Elizabeth Rodier is a great
          >supporter of PaintShopPro and she was fooled by the removal of compressed
          >TIF from FTM during the beta testing of that version whereas, as a
          >Photoshop user, I knew immediately what had happened.
          >
          >You can create non-compressed TIF in PaintShopPro.
          >
          >Now the guy who told you to convert to JPG before importing into FTM was
          >quite wrong. You should convert to uncompressed TIF first. The reason is
          >that FTM converts to JPG for internal storage and if you first convert to
          >JPG you do two JPG conversions leading to unnecessary further degradation.
          >
          >I don't worry with compressed TUF myself, partly because back in the late
          >1980s not all programs supported it and not all could use a compressed file
          >unless it was created by that specific program. I store my images on CD and
          >a saving of 50% is not worth the hassle.
          >
          >One reason I don't like JPG is that there is no standard for users on the
          >degree of compression. Photoshop uses a range of ten plus terms like
          >Maximum, Good etc. PSP used to use a range of 0-75 and Corel PhotoPaint
          >2-255. FTM uses yet another system. Some people say "maximum quality
          >minimum compression" is no loss, while industry experts say there is a
          >no-loss JPG but it is not available in any common program. One thing is
          >certain. Once you create a JPG there is no way to ever know which of the
          >above systems was used or, more importantly, where it was saved over the
          >range of maximum to minimum quality. Very useful for screen and web but not
          >in my view satisfactory for archival storage.
          >
          >Incidentally PCX and BMP will also preserve full quality but have about the
          >same size as TIF and are not industry standards.
          >
          >Hope this helps even if it was not quite what you wanted to hear.
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >
          >Regards, Merv
          >
          >
          >To Post a message, send it to: genphoto@...
          >
          >To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: genphoto-unsubscribe@...
          >
          >list admin: knoblock@... City Gallery: http://www.city-gallery.com/



          I am researching the following surnames:

          AGUILENA
          BELO
          BOLOGNA
          BRUNO
          CARDINALE
          CARDINALLI
          DELLALOCEOS
          ESTRADA
          FLORES
          HERNANDES
          HOLM
          LORETO
          MARENTIS
          MILLS
          MIRANDA
          ROBERTS
          URSINO
          WOOD

          For more details, please visit http://www.cardinalli.com

          Regards,
          Steve Cardinalli

          AOL IM: stevecardinalli
          Yahoo: steve_cardinalli

          ------------------------------------------------------------
          Join the cardinalli_or_cardinale message board:
          http://www.egroups.com/group/cardinalli_or_cardinale
        • E.Rodier
          Merv, My hard drive currently lists 24,917 JPG files, 435 TIF & 381 BMP, already removed the PSP format used for editing. Don t think I ll plan to rescan the
          Message 4 of 9 , Jan 9, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            Merv,
            My hard drive currently lists 24,917 JPG files, 435 TIF & 381 BMP, already
            removed the PSP format used for editing. Don't think I'll plan to rescan the
            JPG but might batch convert some TIF/LZW family pictures sent from
            California on several floppies to uncompressed TIF. Family files are backed
            up on a collection of about 40 CD-Recordables and other products.

            I've never noticed "change colour" and rarely resave a 1600x1200 digital
            camera JPG more than once after editing. Friend was very happy with some six
            foot posters taken with the same model camera, converted to TIF/LZW, copied
            to CD-Recordable and printed at the reproduction service. If I could see the
            difference in uncompressed TIF images, I'd use them for more than just 16
            color documents & maps.

            Those who are new to scanning will need to print pictures, view slide shows
            or use them on a web site to see if the scanner options & image formats
            selected are suitable. Comparing several copies of the same image on the
            screen at the same time works well in newer versions of PSP.
            Elizabeth

            > Mind you there is an exception. If you used compressed TIF with a screen
            > dump then (1) you get none of the loss that JPG gives and (2) you get
            > massive reduction in size, down to 10% and below in my experience, and as
            > low as you get with the highest compression lowest quality JPG of the same
            > file.
          • JackH12345@aol.com
            In a message dated 1/9/01 2:51:53 PM Pacific Standard Time, mleeding@melbpc.org.au writes:
            Message 5 of 9 , Jan 10, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              In a message dated 1/9/01 2:51:53 PM Pacific Standard Time,
              mleeding@... writes:

              << I have used TIF since starting scanning in 1988. It is the industry
              standard and has features that no other formats have. You may not be aware
              that you can embed textual information in the file. >>

              I would like to add descriptive information to a photo file so it can follow
              the photo wherever it goes. How does one do that?


              Jack Hotz
              San Diego
            • Steve Knoblock
              Jack, if I remember, the JPEG standard defined an informational block in the file header (or at least defined some sort of space there that people have used
              Message 6 of 9 , Jan 11, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                Jack,
                if I remember, the JPEG standard defined an "informational" block in the
                file header (or at least defined some sort of space there that people have
                used for same). In any event, some programs will allow information about
                the photo to be placed here. The problem is that not all programs will read
                this information or display it, so it can be lost or invisible. And most
                programs I know do not let you edit the information. It's not strictly
                defined as part of the standard. I believe a new JPEG standard is in the
                works, so perhaps they will addresses this crucial need.

                I cannot remember the name of the program, but two or three years ago there
                was a program for generating web page albums that allowed you to embed info
                in the JPEG file. I had trouble with these images loading in some
                applications until programmers started recognizing this block's existence.

                Steve K.


                >I would like to add descriptive information to a photo file so it can follow
                >the photo wherever it goes. How does one do that?
                >
                -:- Steve Knoblock Email:
                mailto:knoblock@...
                -:- GenPhoto List Administrator Web: http://www.city-gallery.com/
                and http://www.egroups.com/group/genphoto/
                post: genphoto@... unsubscribe: genphoto-unsubscribe@...
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.