Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Why Use Tiff?  (Read 60412 times)

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5956
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #40 on: January 29, 2010, 11:40:53 PM »

Quote from: DPL
I’m currently revisiting a couple of old PCD files (Kodak Photo CD).
My first one is dated 1992. It is getting increasing difficult to open this file format.

Yep, this is typical of orphaned tech...Kodak has quit reving the software for importing Photo CD images (actually since Photoshop CS2 I think) so if you want to open those old Photo CDs, you better keep an old G4 or G5 with Tiger on it  with Photoshop CS or CS2 to access the image packs...
Logged

Peter_DL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 497
Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #41 on: January 30, 2010, 05:01:12 AM »

Quote from: Schewe
Yep, this is typical of orphaned tech...Kodak has quit reving the software for importing Photo CD images (actually since Photoshop CS2 I think) so if you want to open those old Photo CDs, you better keep an old G4 or G5 with Tiger on it  with Photoshop CS or CS2 to access the image packs...
Actually it was/ is still possible to copy the Photo CD.8BI plug-in from an earlier Photoshop version into the CS4 Plug-ins/ File Formats folder, thus to open the PCD files in CS4.  No 64 bit support though (Windowz). The option to edit the resulting TIFFs through Bridge + ACR is a real gem.

… just in case someone around here struggles with the same issue.

Peter

--
Logged

Schewe

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5956
    • http:www.schewephoto.com
Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #42 on: January 30, 2010, 03:37:25 PM »

Quote from: DPL
Actually it was/ is still possible to copy the Photo CD.8BI plug-in from an earlier Photoshop version into the CS4 Plug-ins/ File Formats folder, thus to open the PCD files in CS4.

On Windows yes...not on Mac because Kodak never did a UB version of the import plug-in under Mac. That's why support ended as of Photoshop CS2. Photoshop CS3 required a recompile of all Mac plug-ins from Codewarrior to Xcode. Something Kodak decided not to do.
Logged

Eigil Skovgaard

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11
    • http://www.ask4photos.com
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #43 on: January 22, 2016, 07:35:49 AM »

This is an old thread, but I need to add the most eyecatching difference (with Windows at least) - PSD files show up as the PSD icon, TIFF files as thumbnails, i.e. my TIFFs are recognizable.
Logged
Kind regards,
Eigil

My homepage

Martin Kristiansen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
    • http://www.mkdp.co.za
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #44 on: January 24, 2016, 02:37:34 PM »

If you go to the trouble of creating a clipping path using the pen tool and save the file as a tiff the moment you import that tiff into LR the clipping path is gone.

Trying to open the file directly into PS for some reason opens the file via ACR. The file will then open with the path stripped out. Opening the file from within LR either as a copy or as the original either with or without LR edits has the same result. No path in PS. It is stripped out.

I do a truck load of catalogue photography. I know zip about design but the designers I work with insiston a clipping path. My workflow is create clipping path, drop out background, colour correct, fix product by removing various blemishes and dust spots and so on. The many jobs in progress are held n a LR catalogue. I use PS format because it's kind of useless to use tiff if LR causes the clipping path to be stripped out when I visit PS as I must to do retouching.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11651
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #45 on: January 24, 2016, 03:04:18 PM »

If you go to the trouble of creating a clipping path using the pen tool and save the file as a tiff the moment you import that tiff into LR the clipping path is gone.
Works on this end (Mac) using the latest version of LR6. I just created a clipping path with a fill, I see it in LR after import IF that's what you're referring to.

Quote
Trying to open the file directly into PS for some reason opens the file via ACR.
Again, not on this end, the TIFF opens in Photoshop proper. Maybe you edited the TIFF in ACR in the past? Check your ACR preferences in Photoshop (TIFF and JPEG handling).

Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

pfigen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.peterfigen.com
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #46 on: January 25, 2016, 04:33:18 AM »

Of course, the one place where tiff still doesn't work is when you're doing a real honest to goodness Duotone, Tritone or Quadtone, in which case there are about five options, psb and psd being the two best for most applications. Maybe the default file format should really be psb instead. That pesky 4gb limit on tiff is getting in the way more and more these days anyway.
Logged

Martin Kristiansen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 195
    • http://www.mkdp.co.za
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #47 on: January 25, 2016, 01:38:57 PM »

Works on this end (Mac) using the latest version of LR6. I just created a clipping path with a fill, I see it in LR after import IF that's what you're referring to.
Again, not on this end, the TIFF opens in Photoshop proper. Maybe you edited the TIFF in ACR in the past? Check your ACR preferences in Photoshop (TIFF and JPEG handling).

Thanks for looking into it but not exactly what I meant. Being able to see the fill I mean. I open a tiff file from within LR into PS. I create a path and drop out the background. I save the file and it is automatically added into my LR cat which is then in a stack with the original. I can see the background is now white but when Iopen the file again in PS the clipping path is missing from the paths palette.

If I have a tiff that has never been in LR but only worked on in PS simply importing it into LR now forces the file to open via ACR and once open in PS the path is now gone.

Working on a Mac Pro with the latest OS. Adobe CC 2015. Everything up to date.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11651
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #48 on: January 25, 2016, 02:07:05 PM »

Thanks for looking into it but not exactly what I meant. Being able to see the fill I mean.
I see on my end.
AFAIK, there's nothing LR is or can do to 'remove' the path simply but cataloging the document. Now IF you edit the original, FROM LR, that's a different possible story. But the original image with a Path, cataloged in LR remains and further, no such issue with ACR.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11651
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #49 on: January 25, 2016, 02:08:46 PM »

Of course, the one place where tiff still doesn't work is when you're doing a real honest to goodness Duotone, Tritone or Quadtone, in which case there are about five options, psb and psd being the two best for most applications. Maybe the default file format should really be psb instead. That pesky 4gb limit on tiff is getting in the way more and more these days anyway.
Yes, assuming you're using the old Duotone, Tritone or Quadtone, TIFF doesn't work despite my plea to Adobe to support that. I suspect very, very few people today use Duotone, Tritone or Quadtone...
As for size, the TIFF and PSD limitations are AFAIK, the same hence PSB.
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

pfigen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.peterfigen.com
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #50 on: January 25, 2016, 02:52:38 PM »

"I suspect very, very few people today use Duotone, Tritone or Quadtone...
As for size, the TIFF and PSD limitations are AFAIK"

You see duotones, etc. in higher end printing when designers want a certain look, and while they may not be used as much, it's something that is still done more often than you might think. It's definitely an art to getting it right but when you do, it really does look great. And just because it's a feature that might not be in wide use or one that the current crop of designer know little about doesn't mean it shouldn't be supported.

As far as size limitations, they are not the same. psd has a 2 gb limit while tiff has double that - a 4 gb limit, further making tiff the preferred file type as so many files exceed 2 gb these days - well, at least here they do.
Logged

john beardsworth

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3606
    • http://www.beardsworth.co.uk
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #51 on: January 25, 2016, 03:23:47 PM »

Use TIF in general as in the long term it's better supported. But stick to PSD if you absolutely need the Duotone image mode (most split toning doesn't), if you want to use the file as a Displacement Map, or if you want any transparency to be visible in InDesign. There's one other reason that's slipped my mind, but it's equally obscure.

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11651
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #52 on: January 25, 2016, 03:26:16 PM »

Quote
You see duotones, etc. in higher end printing when designers want a certain look, and while they may not be used as much, it's something that is still done more often than you might think.
Well they can appear to be duotones but can actually RGB data right? I'm referring to actual duotones built as such in Photoshop proper and yes, those don't work as TIFFs. Adobe can and should fix that.


Quote
As far as size limitations, they are not the same. psd has a 2 gb limit while tiff has double that - a 4 gb limit, further making tiff the preferred file type as so many files exceed 2 gb these days - well, at least here they do.
Even better (for TIFF).
According to Chris Cox at Adobe:
PSD files are limited to 2 Gig because of the file format design and compatibility with other applications. That really cannot be changed. That's why we created the PSB format, to allow for much larger files (in pixel dimension and total file size).
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

pfigen

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 514
    • http://www.peterfigen.com
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #53 on: January 25, 2016, 11:05:40 PM »

"Well they can appear to be duotones but can actually RGB data right? I'm referring to actual duotones built as such in Photoshop proper and yes, those don't work as TIFFs. Adobe can and should fix that. "

You can only make a true Duotone from a Grayscale file. That would be one Grayscale for the base and a second channel for the second ink. And so on for any additional channels you might want. A true duotone or tritone looks way better on press than a simulated version in CMYK, but it is more work.

I'm pretty sure that the psd file size limit probably came from the old file size limit in the older (Mac 9.2.2 for example) operating systems which had a hard limit of 2 gb per file. There was no point in having a limit in the file format that was larger than the OS could handle. ALL apps back then were limited to 2 gb or smaller, which is the reason I still have to scan some pieces of film in two chunks.
Logged

digitaldog

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11651
    • http://digitaldog.net/
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #54 on: January 25, 2016, 11:14:34 PM »

You can only make a true Duotone from a Grayscale file. That would be one Grayscale for the base and a second channel for the second ink. And so on for any additional channels you might want. A true duotone or tritone looks way better on press than a simulated version in CMYK, but it is more work.
Right but you could create what appears to be a duotone or similarly, a quadtone with an RGB file right? You don't have to specifically create a duotone or quadtone using the Photoshop process which forces a PSD at save?
Quote
I'm pretty sure that the psd file size limit probably came from the old file size limit in the older (Mac 9.2.2 for example) operating systems which had a hard limit of 2 gb per file.
Then what about TIFF which is as old if not older?
Logged
Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/

smahn

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 194
Re: Why Use Tiff?
« Reply #55 on: January 26, 2016, 12:20:43 AM »


If I have a tiff that has never been in LR but only worked on in PS simply importing it into LR now forces the file to open via ACR and once open in PS the path is now gone.


That's not correct. I work a lot with PS, LR and paths. Your problem is in having your file open in ACR on the way to PS.

Go into your ACR preferences and turn off support for JPEG's and TIF's so that your files open directly into PS. It is ACR that is stripping your paths, not LR.

(And feel free to turn on ACR support again for files without paths, and off again for those with. Wax on, wax off...)
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up