<p>Hi folks,<br />let's say you have hundreds of thousands (and counting) of high-res files from PhaseOne IQ backs or Cruze scanners.<br />Uncompressed 16-bit .tiffs are elsewhere (with client), but you want to keep decent quality .jpgs on site (mainly for viewing on monitor, but some printing in publications is possible now and then).<br />Obviously, the compromise between image quality and file size is a concern.<br>
Would you:<br />1. keep the image size (approx 15000x10000px, some smaller, some bigger) and increase jpg compression (50%?), or<br />2. keep compression to let's say 80-90% and change the image size (to maybe 6000x4000px)?<br>
If one can achieve same file size going either way, which is better?<br />Thanks for every piece of advice, tip or opinion!<br>
Peter</p>
