Hi guys, here's a question about the quality of JPEG's, for those who really understand this stuff. I have several very large image files that I am having printed at Duggal. To save the image as a TIFF requires using a DVD because they're 800MB, larger than what a CD will hold. But if I save the images as 12-quality JPEG's, they are only 140 MB, which can easily be stored on a CD.

So out of curiosity, I tried saving the file both ways, and then opened both files and compared them at 1600%. I could see no visible difference, even in the areas of highest detail and tonal smoothness. The JPEG had every bit of detail and color as the TIFF file did. So the question is, is there any real difference between saving files as uncompressed TIFF's (which takes tons of space), and using the highest-quality JPEG option? If 12-quality JPEG's are just as good, I could save the most humgous amount of hard drive space here.

~cj