Choosing between Superfine and Regular mode in G1

I have taken pictures in both Superfine and Regular mode in G1. When I zoom in, I cannot determine any significant difference in quality. Maybe I am blind or something, but does anyone else notice the difference? If the difference in quality is minimal, I'd much prefer the smaller file size by taking the photos in Regular mode.

Tong Yi Tsui said:

I have taken pictures in both Superfine and Regular mode in G1.
When I zoom in, I cannot determine any significant difference in
quality. Maybe I am blind or something, but does anyone else notice
the difference? If the difference in quality is minimal, I'd much
prefer the smaller file size by taking the photos in Regular mode.

Click to expand...

If you find the regular compression good enough, then it's good enough; they're your pictures. Canon must have found some value in the mode or they wouldn't have bothered programming it.

JPEG is a good compression method that tries to remove elements that the human eye doesn't detect easily. You can often get dramatic file size reductions and still have a decent image.

If you're going to do a lot of post processing or editing of your images, you might want to use superfine. Same if you intend to make large prints. The superfine compression will probably have more unique colors in the image, even if you can't tell by looking. Again, you're the ultimate judge.

I have a friend who sometimes sends me photos for a website we work on. He always shoots in 640 x 480 and high compression. For the web, it works out just fine. I wouldn't want to print these images, but that's not what they're intended for.

I feel the same way..I took a bunch of the same shots at Superfine and Fine and find it hard to tell the difference, even when I print them at 8X10..

Tong Yi Tsui said:

I have taken pictures in both Superfine and Regular mode in G1.
When I zoom in, I cannot determine any significant difference in
quality. Maybe I am blind or something, but does anyone else notice
the difference? If the difference in quality is minimal, I'd much
prefer the smaller file size by taking the photos in Regular mode.

Click to expand...

My two cents....

I ran a test where I took shots in RAW, superfine JPEG (at the largest resolution) and normal JPEG (at the largest resolution). The shots were of static objects with all parameters equal (aperture, shutter speed, lighting ...).

In paint shop pro, I used the count colors tool and found that the converted RAW Files had nearly twice the number of colors than the SF JPEG. While the SF JPEG had slightly more colors than the Normal JPEG.

Then, I printed each shot out on 4x6 paper. I was not able to tell the difference between the JPEGS, but I was able to a difference in the converted RAW print. It was noticeably better, but probably only because I compared the prints side by side. It appeared sharper and more vibrant.

Anyway, I take most of my shots in RAW for this reason. But, if storage was an issue - I wouldn't hesitate to use the normal JPEG setting, knowing I would still get great prints. Not as good as they could be, but still great (especially behind glass or in a photo album).

Daryl said:

Tong Yi Tsui said:

I have taken pictures in both Superfine and Regular mode in G1.
When I zoom in, I cannot determine any significant difference in
quality. Maybe I am blind or something, but does anyone else notice
the difference? If the difference in quality is minimal, I'd much
prefer the smaller file size by taking the photos in Regular mode.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

It's hard to tell someone else what's good enough for them. If you can't see the difference, you can't see the difference.

On the other hand, I can tell you about my experience: when I first started taking pictures, I couldn't see the difference. As my eye improved and my ability to enhance images improved, I now really regret taking some of the pictures in JPEG mode.

There are times (like when I spent a week in Europe) when I simply can't fit all the pictures I want to take on my microdrive using raw. In that case, I shoot regular (or even basic). (Even shoot "basic" in Europe, I could only fit 600 pictures on my 340MB drive. I spent a little time the last two nights deleting the ones that weren't keepers.)

For me, I like to archive the best possible results in their rawest form. It then gives me the option of coming back later and reprocessing it later.

Tong Yi Tsui said:

I have taken pictures in both Superfine and Regular mode in G1.
When I zoom in, I cannot determine any significant difference in
quality. Maybe I am blind or something, but does anyone else notice
the difference? If the difference in quality is minimal, I'd much
prefer the smaller file size by taking the photos in Regular mode.

Click to expand...