My rule with jpegs and pngs is this. If you have a jpeg and want to use it, just use the jpeg directly. Changing it to a png uses more disk space and has no real advantage. If on the other hand you want to make any changes in that jpeg with photoshop (lighten, enlarge, crop, etc.), save your changed file as a png. That way you are not doing further damage by adding another generation of jpeg compression.

> 1. Whats the best way to convert jpgs to pngs?

No way because it is not necessary and a useless exercise. Once you have compressed a file as a JPEG there is no advantage to making it a PNG. The compression artifacts, if any, will be in the PNG as well.

Laurence said this already but I'll reiterate... the only reason for using PNG (other than needing an alpha channel) is if you were going to process the file further in Photoshop. Then you might want to convert it to a lossless format so that no further loss occurs. But for just using the image in Vegas there is no reason to convert JPEGS because they work fine. You would have to have a pretty low quality JPEG to see compression artifacts in the video.

I have been making photo montages with Vegas for over 8 years now (since Vegas Video 3.0) and I have always used JPEGS and my montages are exceptional quality.

~jr

No problems with 9.0d 64 bit and JPEG. I do the same as Laurence, if I'm going to alter the image in Photoshop, I save as PNG. Just a habit with Vegas.

I think the story with PNG has gotten a little warped over time. As I remember it, we'd all recommend converting TIF files to PNG because TIF had sluggish playback in Vegas.

Rob

There was also the widely circulated rumor that "PNG is Vegas' native format", which has never had any sign of factual backing.

Spot still (in his latest edition) recommends using PNG files for "optimum use in Vegas". If I understand him correctly his reason is that PNG are not compressed. I generally don't mess with success--- if my orig file is JPEG, I leave it alone unless it causes a problem or I want to modify it --- then I save as PNG.

Well, a PNG is compressed but the method isn't aggressive and it's lossless. It's a very good format for text and graphics that use a limited palette or include transparency (aka, an alpha channel). It's also perfectly fine for photos but it takes a lot of space on disc.

A PNG and a JPG should take up the same amount of RAM when they're decompressed, so the issue of size should only apply to disc space. It's possible that PNG takes less CPU power to decompress, but that's just a guess.

Whether PNG is "native" to Vegas isn't really clear. The licensing is free and it has nice features, and Vegas exports the format, so it's a reasonable candidate to use on the timeline.

One very good thing that PNG provides is an 8-bit alpha channel. This doesn't just give you transparency, it gives you 255 levels of transparency between totally transparent and totally opaque. This allows you have an image of a graphic with a transparent background and you can bake in a 50% transparent drop shadow. Or you can have soft edges. It's a very handy format and does something that's totally impossible with a jpeg file.

On the other hand, I think Perrone pointed out that PNG has a kind of indefinite gamma so it could look different going from one application to another. Something to watch out for.

Rob Mack

So, well, my question, then, would be: if I am working with a JPG in Photoshop, would it not be preferable to save as PSD instead of PNG?—especially since Vegas can now handle the layers?

Tim Robertson

If you're working in photoshop and have to save a psd file then, sure, use the PSD file in Vegas. I would have done that before vegas recognized layers, just because it's more flexible than a PNG.

In fact, Vegas's new ability to recognize PSD layers kind of implies creating layers differently than you might have otherwise done. If you just want to preserve a flexible composition in a single image that is easy to edit later then by all means use folders and adjustment layers and styles, etc.

On the other hand, if you want to use the layers as objects in Vegas then you'd probably get rid of all those things and flatten certain parts of the image.

In the end, know your tools, make informed decisions, and test the things people tell you to see if they're really true.

Rob

Ok, looks like I got what I was looking for and more.

Like other posts above I've been using jpgs since Vegas 4 or 5 and now in 8, and am not aware that is't ever been an issue.

So based on what' been shared here, I don't think for my use, there is any reason to convert any photos and continue to use jpgs if fine.

Thanks, ya all