Shrinking JPG files and print quality

PeterGar

Like many of us, I shrink my proof images files down to JPEG 7. I then replace them with the JPEG 10 versions of the files during the proof delay period.

Here are a few questions regarding this:

1. If I just have the JPEG 7 version of the file sent to print, will my clients notice a loss of quality when ordering prints up to 8x10? How about larger prints? How about just 4x6 and 5x7 prints? If I don't have to replace the files, I would rather not. This is clumsy and time-consuming when dealing with large orders.
2. When in the order's proof-delay menu, I click "Replace Photo" for each photo, and I am then taken to the "Replace" page for that particular image. Although on the order menu the filenames for the images are listed below the thumbnails, on "Replace" page it shows only the image, but no longer shows the filename. When I am dealing with a large order, I sometimes forget the filename of the image and either have to write them down or go back to the order page. Can the filename just simply be displayed on the Replace menu also, in addition to the thumbnail?

Thanks in advance!!!

edit: Also, once I've replaced some files in a gallery, is there any way to know which files have been replaced with the larger JPEG 10 and which are still the smaller JPEG 7?

brjphoto

PeterGar wrote:

Like many of us, I shrink my proof images files down to JPEG 7. I then replace them with the JPEG 10 versions of the files during the proof delay period.

Here are a few questions regarding this:

1. If I just have the JPEG 7 version of the file sent to print, will my clients notice a loss of quality when ordering prints up to 8x10? How about larger prints? How about just 4x6 and 5x7 prints? If I don't have to replace the files, I would rather not. This is clumsy and time-consuming when dealing with large orders.

The only person who can answer this is you. Upload two versions of the photo. Print them both and then report back whether you can tell a difference.

I look forward to hearing your conclusion.

PeterGar

brjphoto wrote:

The only person who can answer this is you. Upload two versions of the photo. Print them both and then report back whether you can tell a difference.

I look forward to hearing your conclusion.

I'm kinda hoping someone else has already done the research.

mercphoto

PeterGar wrote:

I'm kinda hoping someone else has already done the research.

Even if someone had its still a subjective call. Just how much loss of quality is "noticeable"? The answer is different for different people. Some people think MP3's sound just fine. Others like me cringe.

PeterGar

mercphoto wrote:

Even if someone had its still a subjective call. Just how much loss of quality is "noticeable"? The answer is different for different people. Some people think MP3's sound just fine. Others like me cringe.

I get it...

ivar

Why not upload the quality-10 right away?

PeterGar

ivar wrote:

Why not upload the quality-10 right away?

To upload 1,000+ proofs from a wedding at 5MB-6MB each takes too long over DSL.