[robski]

Originally Posted by Don Hoey

Rob,
The inference being that jpeg users are one down at this stage. My check proves that statement to be incorrect in an out of camera image unless in camera compression is somehow turned up.
Don

This has been my point - it is dependent on what co-efficient values are used to configure the fine/best quality setting by the camera. By this I mean the numbers fed to the encoder to set it up before compression takes place. This all happens in the background of the program. One of the parameters ranges from 1000 to 0. It's effect is very logarithmic. Values between 1000 and 30 have only a small effect on the file size. As the value tends towards zero the compression becomes more and more extreme.

If this thread continues I may be inclined to getting around to re-installing my compilers on this machine and write a program to compare the image data values after multiple saves in the jpeg format to confirm if it gets degraded as many people infer. My early tests of this suggest that it does not to any degree.