jpg media encoder to png?

[jerryneedledoctor]

Is there any advantage to run a jpg threw media encoder and  have it render a png.

is that png goint to offer a better edit excperience

i think thee may be an advantage but it could be wishful thinking on my part

topaz has a softwear they claim can produce raw but i wan't impressed

i 

[Sumeet Kumar Choubey · Accepted solution]

Hi there,

Here is my thought on this. Transcoding a media (image/video) from a highly compressed codec (like h.264 or jpeg) to a less compressed codec like (Prores or Tiff) may result in better performance in some cases. This is because the compressed codecs usually require more processing power for the encoding and decoding process. However, transcoding the media won't improve the image quality any more than the original file. Hope it helps.

Thanks,

Sumeet 

[jerryneedledoctor]

Thank you that answers my question if the jpeg can become a higher quality file and your saying no. 

Topaz offers a jpg to raw stand alone option that doen't work.

Does anybody have any ideas on improving a jpeg to make it edit worthy or am i barking up the wrong tree.

Thank you

[Brandon Loshe]

I think Sumeet pretty much answered your questions. It depends on the source material. That's why I typically ask for the original source file. If it's graphics, then I ask for the original vector artwork (typically Illustrator). If it's a photo, then I ask if the shooter happened to take the picture in a raw format. But unfortunately, sometimes all you get is a low-quality jpeg, and you just have work with what you got.

[jerryneedledoctor]

I  can say that there have been times the conversion seemed to work, but not everytime.

Thank you

[Ekuseni Video · Accepted solution]

It's not a good idea to edit a jpg file, as it is a "lossy" format - i.e. each time you save it the quality is reduced.

[jerryneedledoctor]

Thank you for saying the jpg has a loss everytime saved.

I'll consider this in my workflow.

[jerryneedledoctor]

it was good information that made sence to my experience 

indeed there were some images that seemed to benifit but not all

using a tiff was an intellegent idea i wouldn't have thought of myself

Jpg arn't fun to edit 

encodding jpg to tiff maybe wishfull thinking in my head but i do it anyway because i have to try 

it's a gray area and Topaz jpg to raw doen't work at all from my experience

media encoder seems to offer a degree of edit better than jpg and i admit its a degree

[Ethylathw3564432139xb]

About converting JPG to PNG through a media encoder, it's an interesting thought! While PNG is lossless and can offer better quality for edits, it might not magically enhance the initial JPG. It's more about preserving quality during further edits rather than improving the original. I get the wishful thinking, though! Regarding Topaz's claim, it's a hit or miss sometimes. And hey, have you tried JPEG Optimizer? It's been my go-to lately. It compress jpeg without compromising too much quality. I'm fairly new here, so still exploring the ropes. Anyone else got insights on this? Let's figure it out together!