Before the rush

Before the rush
by evan-pak

Submit your Photo
Hall of Fame

Please participate in Meta
and help us grow.

Photography Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for professional, enthusiast and amateur photographers. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I'm looking for an image format, unpopular as it may be, that has good quality and also good compression. After I'm done post-processing my RAWs I want to export them in a way that's shareable and practical, trying to save as much space as possible. PNG seems too heavy and JPG is quite lossy.

share|improve this question
Even if you can find something better than JPEG, it's not likely to be widely used enough to be "shareable and practical." When you say JPEG is "quite lossy," what software are you using to export the files, and with what settings? What problems are you seeing that make you think it's too lossy? – coneslayer Feb 10 '12 at 18:48
up vote 2 down vote accepted

It depends on what you mean by "shareable" and "practical". Are you sending your images to the web, a printer, or just your own storage solution? The only practical format for the web is JPEG. If you are sending to a printer you can probably chose between TIFF, JPEG, and PSD. If you are just storing it yourself, you could use PSD, PNG, TIFF, JPEG, DNG, or your native RAW format.

Practically speaking, JPEG is great quality and sharable so there is not a real need for anything beyond that at this time. See my previous post on JPEG 2000.

share|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.