[Digikam-users] Metadata and jpg quality?

Kim kim.mills at wightman.ca
Tue Feb 19 22:27:57 GMT 2013

Hi Simon,  Thank you for testing that out and sharing the results.

Many of the files I'm working with right now, I scanned about 10-12 
years ago and no longer have access to the original photos. I did scan 
them at 300dpi thankfully.  The older photos that I do own, I scan as 
both TIFF and JPG.  I don't think the scanner I had 10 years ago offered 
TIFF's in their software and I know the pc I had back then wouldn't have 
had room on it's tiny hard drive for many of them either.


On 02/19/2013 05:15 PM, Simon Cropper wrote:
> Kim,
> Although I was aware that this is the correct answer, I decided to 
> test the system - which is easy enough to do.
> Actually editing (even if no changes are made) then saving a JPG image 
> 5 or more times (usually less) will show clear changes in image quality.
> I updated a copy of the image's metadata 12 times yet was unable to 
> see any introduced artifacts using the light table feature at x1200. 
> So as Jean-Fran├žois rightfully explained only the header section of 
> the JPG file is being updated.
> It is worth noting that you can set the preferences so that the 
> metadata is saved to XMP files -- a good option if you work with RAW 
> files (as the save metadata to RAW files is only an experimental 
> feature).
> I also have worked through my old heirloom photos. Are these scanned 
> images or old digital files that were taken in JPG? If you are 
> scanning your photos why are you saving as JPGs? Being loosy you are 
> introducing artifacts from the get-go.

More information about the Digikam-users mailing list