PE 14 - Non-destructive or convert to TIFF first?

[jjtrinva]

I'm jumping back into photo editing after several years.  When I first started, the advice was convert all of my jpegs to TIFF and edit in that format to avoid any issues with loss of quality within the image as I applied edits.  Now I'm getting up to speed on non-destructive editing. If I understand correctly, the main advantage (and I'm being overly simple here) is that it doesn't actually make any edits to the image until you export the final product as a separate image with your edits while preserving the original image.


Does PE 14 use non-destructive editing techniques or is that limited to program likes Lightroom?  

Either way, is it still better to start my workflow by converting images to TIFF?

I plan on starting "slow" and not quite ready to jump to Lightroom, or editing with layers.  And while I took about half my pictures with a raw file option, I rather wait to make that leap as well.

Thanks in advance!

[Tpgettys]

Hi jjtrinva ; welcome to Photoshop Elements & More!

The most common image file format is JPG, but it is a "lossy" format; what that means is that if you open a JPG file and then save it, the new file will be different than the one you opened, even if you did nothing to it!  That will not happen with TIFF files; TIFF is a non-lossy format.  It is important to appreciate that that is independent of the software you use to edit an image.

As you used it, I think the term "non-destructive editing" refers to the use of layers.  Regardless of which photo-editing software you use, you can make a duplicate of your image on a new layer and then apply edits to it; in that way the original is not altered.  There is much more that can be said, but I hope that will get the conversation started.

When you save an image, the default file format is PSD, which preserves all the layers you may have created, and is non-lossy.  You can of course also choose to save the image as a JPG, TIFF, etc.

I hope to see you around PSE&M; you will find this a friendly and supportive forum!

[michelb]

Also please consider my answer in the same question you asked in the Adobe forum:
forums.adobe.com/thread/2146508

The fact that jpeg is a lossy compressed format is not the main reason to adopt a non-destructive workflow like Lightroom.
A a matter of fact, my workflow (with Elements only) is nearly 100% non-destructive. I use the ACR converter, and for the rest I use the editor with layers, as indicated by tpgettys.
I keep the result in .psd format until I consider no further editing will be needed, then I use jpeg. I always have the originals, whether they are raws or jpegs, and the ACR edits are always still available.

[jjtrinva]

Thanks all. I did see that using ACR Converter on PE was an option, but admittedly have been a bit shy about using it. I'll give it a go and see how I like it. In the meantime, good to know that converting to TIFF and using that file to actually edit with is still considered an acceptable workflow. I'm also not worried about space, since I house my files on a 4 TB drive and keep that backed up to a 4 TB Time Machine. So it's easy for me to keep copies of jpegs, tiffs, etc.

[michelb]

Using the ACR plugin is not difficult.
As a matter of fact it's much simpler than mastering the layers blend modes and the workflow to save all editing steps in correctly labelled layers.
- It's better to correct white balance, shadows and highlights and tones in general, without needing curves.
- It has 'clarity' sliders and the noise reduction as well as sharpening are excellent.
- You can easily apply the same edits to several files opened at the same time, or to the next edited file. Try to do that with layered tiffs.
- With jpegs, the same original file lets you keep the original, your own edits (or the default auto edits, which are better than in the editor quick mode). Yes, I know, space is not a problem for you...

To summarize: better quality and a lot of time saving as well as disk space saving.
And if you think upgrading to Lightroom later may be an option for you, you'll already be acquainted with the tools and the way to visually correct your pictures .

[Fauxtoto]

JJTrinva, I started Digital photo with a Point and Shoot, jpg only, and PSE. Like you, I go slowly and I waited a while to use ACR. Later, I switched to RAW. I say:Keep your own paste, but go for it! If you are not on a rush, and shy, just bring some of your jpg images in ACR, and play with them. It will not take long that you will find it easy, and quite useful. Once you are familiar with it, I would not be surprised that you integrate ACR in your regular workflow. Many people do the first steps of the edit in ACR and then bring the result into PSE to complete the edit as needed. After a while, because everyone will keep telling you that ACR does about the same thing for raw files than what it does for jpgs, but better, in a wider range, with more flexibility, you will not be able to resist, and you will try RAW, to find out that it is already easy for you to use.

As for Lightroom, I am just starting to learn and use it. Essentially, I see it as a more developed ACR, incidentally paired with a few useful editing features which are of the same nature of some editing features already existing in PSE. When you have already used a PSE and ACR, Lightroom is no big deal to learn.

Good luck in your editing endeavors. Enjoy!