Skip to main content

The Basics: Digital Imaging- File Format types

File Formats

What format you use is dictated by your goal. Libraries have a tendency to want to have a small access copy of reasonable quality, and a high quality archival copy of reasonable file size.


To get a better idea of what the different formats are, and what they do, I've linked to some articles:


TIFF (Tagged Image File Format )
JPEG
JPEG2000
PDF

JPEG is the perfect format for full color or grayscale images because it provides a nice balance between quality and file size. The format is stable as long as you do not edit the file over and over. If you are going to be editing the file, save it as a Tiff first, then save it as a JPEG. JPEGs are perfect for access copies, and sometimes for Archival copies.

A full color or grayscale Tiff is huge as far as file size goes. A black and white Tiff, however, is generally smaller than a black and white JPEG. Don’t ask me why. Tiff also provides the best quality and stability. You can use Tiffs for archival storage if you have a lot of storage space and not a lot of items. However, if you are strapped for storage space and have lots of items, go for JPEG.

A PDF is a good delivery format becasue it is a format that can be vewied the same on different computers, and if there is OCRed text involved, it can contain that text and offer it to the patron in a format that is familyer.

Lossless vs. Lossy formats (Abriviation of Color)

The Reason why Jpegs and Tiffs are different is that Jpegs are generally lossy (they lose or truncate some data- making the file size and quality lower) and Tiffs can be either lossy or lossless (each pixel’s data is recorded- making the quality better and the file size much larger).

Why no other formats matter:

Other formats (Gif, Bitmap, etc.) often fall short of one of the two conditions (either they don’t have enough quality, or they require too much memory space for the quality that you get).

You may want to look into JPEG 2000, because the format supposedly takes the best parts of a JPEG (small file size for the quality) and Tiff (uncompressed information), and serves it up in one complete package. However, look into it before you use JPEG 2000 because it has not been fully accepted by the information community and it might not be widely well known to your users.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Atiz scanner and Kirtas scanner aren’t playing nice with eachother

I love the Atiz scanner for it's simplicity, good design, and utility. I love the Kirtas scanners for their speed and their "wow" factor when people see the things work. The only problem I have at the moment is taking our current Kirtas workflow (using Kirtas's software Bookscan Editor, Superbatch, and OCR manager), and finding a way to make the Atiz scanner workflow work with it. The Atiz machine came with a hefty batch editing program that does a great job of cleaning up the images and making them wonderfully presentable. The machine even came with a PDF maker, but it doesn't OCR on its own, and it doesn't give you the options that Kirtas' OCR manager do. So, I want to process the Atiz scanner finished images using Kirtas’s OCR manager. However, that seems to be more difficult than I had first expected. For the next month, I’ll be trying to figure out how to make this marriage of Atiz and Kirtas systems work. If it ends up failing, then I may have t...

Ex Libris Digital Preservation system

Today I attended a webinar from Sun Microsystems about the new Ex Libris Digital Preservation system. You can view the webinar here . The talking points are they handle all the hardware and they can handle the software. They claim it’s secure and built with redundancy. The major problem is that they say you can’t provide access to the files without getting Primo (Ex Libris’s new Amazon-like catalog toy-which is looking fun). They won’t convert the files for you when the formats out of style, but they make it so that you can maintain and upgrade the files. All and all, I like the idea of a comprehensive digital preservation system being handled by people who know hardware. I Just think it is going to be too expensive for most libraries. Time will tell how many libraries pick this up.

Microfilm and Microfiche scanners

I have been researching high speed microfiche and microfilm scanners for the last year. There are four major companies that produce microform scanners. Mekel (a Crowley Company), Wicks and Wilson , nextScan ,and Sunrise . They each have their advantages and disadvantages. Both nextScan and Sunrise have 3-in-1 or 2-in-1 models, where you have one machine (~$100,000) that comes with one attachment, and you buy other attachments for different types of microform (Microfilm, Microfiche, and Aperture card). Each attachment costs extra. I never figured out the cost for the attachments. nextScan also has a dedicated roll film scanner , that I’ve heard good reviews from the Newspaper Digitization Project in Australia . In general, I have heard that the 3-in-1 or 2-in-1 machines are fine, but they tend to go slower than dedicated machines. They really are built for versatility and marketed toward libraries who can only afford one machine that can do all types (Paying $100,000+ for one...