[HN Gopher] Mr TIFF
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Mr TIFF
        
       Author : speckx
       Score  : 973 points
       Date   : 2025-11-04 22:57 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (inventingthefuture.ghost.io)
 (TXT) w3m dump (inventingthefuture.ghost.io)
        
       | righthand wrote:
       | Crazy this information would have probably been lost in time if
       | one single person on this planet didn't give a shit like the rest
       | of us.
       | 
       | What a journey and congratulations to SC (don't want to spoil it)
       | on your 15 minutes and rightful restoration as inventor of TIFF,
       | take your place in history.
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | thanks righthand, i guess it was just curiosity that led me
         | down the path. most people do give a sh## but i hear you. i
         | also had the time to search, as i wasn't super busy with work.
        
           | righthand wrote:
           | Thank you so much again for your efforts, I sound brash but
           | this really is inspiring and as you demonstrated and have
           | indicated, we can all use our free time to easily make the
           | world a little more accurate and better.
        
           | Nition wrote:
           | I'd like to add, it's really nice when good people get
           | recognized purely for their work, rather than because they're
           | loud enough to be noticed. I very much appreciate people like
           | yourself that take the time to look for the quiet ones like
           | this.
        
       | mikestorrent wrote:
       | Pretty amazing investigation work. Very nice to see that credit
       | is being given where due.
        
         | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
         | I participated in creating a history book, in regard to an
         | organization in which I'm involved.
         | 
         | It took eight years, and was a _lot_ of work. The process that
         | he mentioned is quite familiar. Many of the folks we
         | interviewed have since passed away. Some, before the book was
         | complete.
        
           | mikestorrent wrote:
           | Threads like this are, in a sense, like a digital wake - we
           | can all mourn Carlsen a little bit now. I remember the first
           | time I saw a .TIF - on Rainbow Paint, a free paint program
           | bundled with a Dexxa mouse my old man bought as an upgrade
           | for our 286. To me, running across a random .tif somewhere
           | was such a delight, something I could open as a surprise,
           | maybe re-use parts of, zoom into, etc. or share on a disk
           | with a friend. It's quaint, now...
        
       | lookingdesk wrote:
       | I checked the TIFF talk page and found comments from:
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Scarlsen
       | 
       | Turns out the answer was on Wikipedia already :).
        
         | adzm wrote:
         | If anyone can contact John Buck this sounds like information
         | he'd be interested in. Also an interesting avenue for future
         | investigative work.
        
           | hellojohnbuck wrote:
           | thanks adam
        
             | pinkmuffinere wrote:
             | Hey John, I'm just curious how people find these comments
             | about "would be nice if X saw this" on HN. I don't think
             | there's any pinging behavior. Did somebody message you? Did
             | you just happen to read it? Do you have an eldritch curse
             | that summons you when called by name?
        
               | throwaway314155 wrote:
               | Not who you're asking for, but generally I think it's
               | just a case of the author also being an HN regular.
               | Although, I suppose you could set up some Google Alerts
               | for mentions of your blog posts.
        
               | hellojohnbuck wrote:
               | Somebody subscribed to my blog with ref to hacker news so
               | i just poked my head in :-)
        
               | shawn_w wrote:
               | Once upon a time there was a guy who went by Kibo who
               | would search Usenet feeds for posts mentioning his
               | username and reply to them...
        
               | wiredfool wrote:
               | Kibo greps
        
               | Cthulhu_ wrote:
               | I bet Musk hacked something together (or has a column in
               | TweetDeck if that's still around) that continuously
               | searches for mentions. I wonder if there's a tool like
               | that that covers more of the internet, although the
               | primary users would only be famous people and/or their
               | agents / social media staff.
        
               | wongarsu wrote:
               | There are lots of tools that do this if you are willing
               | to pay for it. "Social Media Monitoring" or "Brand
               | Monitoring" would be the keywords to search for
        
               | davedx wrote:
               | From what I've seen, sometimes people see that their blog
               | post got a lot of referral traffic from Hacker News and
               | they come have a look to see where it came from.
        
               | kens wrote:
               | I use f5bot.com, which monitors HN, Reddit, and Lobsters.
               | (I have no connection to f5bot except being a happy
               | user.)
        
               | phibz wrote:
               | I've seen Ken Shirriff do this. You mention him and
               | suddenly he's there.
        
               | kens wrote:
               | hi! :-) As I commented elsewhere, f5bot.com is a nice,
               | free tool to monitor HN
        
         | oidar wrote:
         | His lone comment:
         | 
         | >Yes it is true: the second word of a TIFF file, 42, was indeed
         | taken from the answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the
         | Universe, and Everything, from Hitchhikers_guide_to_the_galaxy.
         | StephenECarlsen 23:38, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
        
         | svat wrote:
         | Thanks! If you look at his (logged-in) edits on Wikipedia
         | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Scarlsen
         | ), then apart from the lone comment on the talk page (about the
         | reason for "42") and creating that user page, he has two edits
         | to the TIFF article:
         | 
         | - one of them clarifies the (non-)involvement of Microsoft:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=TIFF&diff=prev&ol...
         | 
         | - and the other is even more interesting: though he is being
         | scrupulous and _removing_ a sentence that has no published
         | citations, in his edit summary he confirms that it is basically
         | true:
         | 
         | > _The author of the original TIFF specification wanted TIFF to
         | stand for "The Image File Format", but he was overruled by
         | Aldus' president Paul Brainerd on the grounds that it sounded
         | presumptuous._
         | 
         | (The edit summary says: _Removed the "The Image File Format"
         | sentence, since it only has eye-witness support (me, for one),
         | but no published citatations_)
        
           | vanderZwan wrote:
           | Ok so then we could technically edit it back in since he's a
           | primary source, right?
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | Technically yes, but I'm fairly sure Wikipedia wants cited
             | sources, not "I'm the guy, I said so" anecdotal sources.
             | 
             | Of course, if he was still alive he could have written a
             | blog post or something like that and use that as a source,
             | much like how it's likely this blog post will be used as a
             | source for things surrounding the format and person.
        
             | wongarsu wrote:
             | That would be what Wikipedia calls "original research". A
             | big no-no on wikipedia. At a minimum he would have to tweet
             | or blog about it and link the tweet or blog. And even then
             | that's a primary source, which wikipedia considers less
             | valuable. Ideally he would get someone else to report on
             | his tweet/blog and use that as source. Then the wikipedia
             | gods are happy
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_original_researc
             | h
        
               | beAbU wrote:
               | So can we use this conversation on HN as a secondary
               | source, and edit the deletion back in citing Hacker News?
        
             | svat wrote:
             | It's been a few years since I edited Wikipedia seriously,
             | but the criterion for inclusion on Wikipedia is/was
             | "verifiability, not truth" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W
             | ikipedia:Verifiability,_not_t...) - what matters is not
             | whether something is true, but whether it has been
             | published in a reliable source
             | (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources).
             | Accordingly, Wikipedia tries to be based on secondary
             | sources (rather than primary and tertiary ones). The
             | relevant section (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:N
             | o_original_research...) says, among other things:
             | 
             | > Primary sources that have been reputably published may be
             | used in Wikipedia, but only with care
             | 
             | and I imagine a Wikipedia edit summary does not count as a
             | reliable source. (For one thing, despite it being very
             | plausible that the Wikipedia user Scarlsen who signed
             | himself as Stephen E Carlsen is indeed that person--I
             | believe it completely!--it cannot be guaranteed that it
             | wasn't an impostor, for example.)
        
       | pstuart wrote:
       | This is valuable work in cataloging the foundations of the
       | computing industry!
       | 
       | It's weird to see times one has lived through presented as
       | ancient history....
        
         | ahazred8ta wrote:
         | Computer science is such a young field that we can still sit at
         | the feet of the giants whose shoulders we stand on.
        
       | hyperhello wrote:
       | And that's a wonderful lesson to try searching alternate
       | spellings of names for an oral history.
        
       | dado3212 wrote:
       | Did a similar deep dive for one of the posters for the cult
       | classic movie Possession (1981). Just giving random phone numbers
       | a call is incredibly effective, lots of people are happy to
       | reminisce about old work and have great stories.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | Very often these people are so humble and so amazed to find
         | that anyone cares so much about some little project they did.
         | I've brought some people to comic cons and they have been blown
         | away by the fans they never knew they had. (and they always
         | have fascinating industry stories to tell)
        
       | OisinMoran wrote:
       | If you had told me an article ostensibly about a file format
       | would have me teary-eyed by the end I wouldn't have believed you.
       | This is beautiful, thank you!
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | Thanks oisin, it's a beautiful story and his ex-wife gave me
         | permission to share.
        
           | isoprophlex wrote:
           | It is, indeed. Thanks for writing that up, it touched me.
           | 
           | And thanks for being the historian of our culture-that-
           | eschews culture (or so it seems to me sometimes, that tech
           | tries to exist in a perennial present without acknowledging
           | it's roots and history)
        
             | hellojohnbuck wrote:
             | thanks isoprophlex for the acknowledgment. so many of the
             | folks that i have interviewed, contributed so much to
             | making tech or a product better for all. especially at or
             | around apple. they receieved none of the credit that the
             | 'names' got. ;-) you know who i mean.
        
           | daniel_reetz wrote:
           | A huge number of us labor behind the scenes with no public
           | acknowledgment or credit. For each idea brought to life we
           | might hope for -at most- an epitaph carved in expired patent
           | claims.
           | 
           | This story is touching.
        
           | btreecat wrote:
           | Thank you both!
        
       | nullhole wrote:
       | Don't have much to add except to mention again that the magic
       | number for TIF is 42, and it's 42 because of the meaning of 42:
       | 
       | https://web.archive.org/web/20210108174645/https://www.adobe...
       | Bytes 2-3       An arbitrary but carefully chosen number (42)
       | that further identifies the file as a TIFF file
        
         | adzm wrote:
         | And here is the author himself confirming that in the Wikipedia
         | talk page for TIFF!
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:TIFF/Archive_1#h-Source_f...
        
           | Tempat1 wrote:
           | Great find! And oh no, it's complete with the customary
           | blissfully unaware user replying to say he's wrong!
        
           | rzzzt wrote:
           | Are talk pages accepted as a source for the same article?
        
             | speedgoose wrote:
             | Talk pages aren't valid sources in general. In this case
             | the author is dead and an established expert having
             | published in the field, so I guess it's fine, but I
             | wouldn't bet.
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability#Self-
             | p...
        
           | darkwater wrote:
           | Hindsight is 20/20 and I loved TFA and I don't want to ruin
           | it but... that comment was there from 2007 and the Wikipedia
           | user bio was pretty clear since the beginning (https://en.wik
           | ipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Scarlsen&old...)
        
             | svat wrote:
             | Yes but it's not easy to find random Wikipedia user pages,
             | or even find the specific talk page comment in the archives
             | without knowing what to look for. Go ahead, find a friend,
             | give them no clues, and see if they find it.
        
               | darkwater wrote:
               | Yes but the author was specifically investing over this,
               | had a clue on a similar name and even edited the same
               | page himself.
        
               | svat wrote:
               | I don't know what "investing over" means, but all I can
               | say is (repeating myself): try it with a friend, without
               | giving them the benefit of hindsight.
               | 
               | (Very few visitors to a Wikipedia page read its talk
               | page, very few of them will further look at the
               | _archives_ of the talk page, let alone read every single
               | comment and its corresponding commenter 's name, and in
               | this case as soon as the author knew the spelling to look
               | for, the rest was straightforward for them.)
        
               | hellojohnbuck wrote:
               | well said svat. without laboring the point, "once you
               | know - you know". until then it is like trying to find a
               | needle in a haystack - and some people do not want to be
               | found.
        
           | bambax wrote:
           | (Also: 42 is the answer to everything because it's the ascii
           | code for *).
        
             | Cthulhu_ wrote:
             | Was that a happy coincidence or intentional?
        
               | clan wrote:
               | Perfectly pure happiness:
               | 
               | "The answer to this is very simple. It was a joke. It had
               | to be a number, an ordinary, smallish number, and I chose
               | that one. Binary representations, base thirteen, Tibetan
               | monks are all complete nonsense. I sat at my desk, stared
               | into the garden and thought '42 will do' I typed it out.
               | End of story." from the man himself[1]
               | 
               | ...but let us not ruin a good story with the truth.
               | Remember why earth was built. The "real" answer might
               | then be flowing in the ether.
               | 
               | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrases_from_The_Hitchh
               | iker%27...
        
               | bambax wrote:
               | I think it was intentional but I don't have a source.
               | 
               | Edit: from the other comment, it appears it was in fact
               | random...
        
             | abdusco wrote:
             | > the ASCII code for h
             | 
             | Umm. The ASCII code for h is 102 ;)
        
               | bambax wrote:
               | I don't know why or how you're seeing an h? I'm talking
               | about the asterisk.
        
               | 0manrho wrote:
               | I could be wrong but the winky face leads me to believe
               | theyre referencing the hunter2 password meme
        
               | bambax wrote:
               | Ah, thanks! I wasn't familiar with this meme. It is
               | funny.
        
           | jakub_g wrote:
           | And interestingly, the person he replies to is taviso [0][1]
           | 
           | [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=taviso
           | 
           | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tavis_Ormandy
        
         | Rygian wrote:
         | Based on the same algorithm as https://xkcd.com/221/
        
         | 71bw wrote:
         | 42 even shows up in the late mr. Carlsen's obituary. [1]
         | 
         | [1]https://www.mountainviewtacoma.com/obituaries/stephen-
         | carlse...
        
           | CalChris wrote:
           | I remember Steve.
        
         | antonis-gr wrote:
         | 42 is an extremely non-special number. Does anyone know if it
         | appeared in the CS field before Douglas Addams "invented" it?
        
           | layer8 wrote:
           | What do you mean, non-special? 42 is the magic constant of
           | the smallest non-trivial magic cube.
        
             | hnlmorg wrote:
             | It's also an integer. Who ch I pretty special when you
             | consider that most numbers in nature are real.
        
               | layer8 wrote:
               | I have yet to see a number in nature.
        
               | hnlmorg wrote:
               | Nature is full of them.
        
           | slim wrote:
           | *was
        
       | gnerd00 wrote:
       | TIFF indeed -- I recall the floppy disk for Mac mailed from
       | Seattle with the TIFF spec printed on paper. A few weeks later,
       | another graphics editor with TIFF support. I never, ever heard
       | the name Carlsen until today. Thank you for this article
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | thanks gnerd
        
       | qrush wrote:
       | RIP Mr. TIFF. Hoping we continue to document these incredible
       | engineers and their work before it's lost to the sands of
       | time/pits of LLM muck.
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | i've interviewed 100 folks in this space, in part because they
         | are older than us.
        
       | Upvoter33 wrote:
       | Beautiful and moving. Thank you author of the article and thank
       | you Mr TIFF
        
         | adzm wrote:
         | I was not expecting the emotional ending. Really well done.
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | thanks upvoter
        
       | myth_drannon wrote:
       | Glad that the information was preserved in the magazines, usenet
       | messages and just text files. That will not happen with the
       | modern web software, the internet is the dark ages of our time.
       | All those Java,Flash amazing pieces of software and the stories
       | of their creators will be gone long before the internet dies from
       | LLM slop.
        
         | qingcharles wrote:
         | I think of all the content we've lost already. MySpace files
         | are lost. Friendster archives are gone. So many YouTube videos
         | lost to time.
        
           | oidar wrote:
           | And Geocities, Vine, Google+, Anglefire, Tripod, Xoom,
           | Homestead, Lycos communities, AOL Hometown, MSN Groups,
           | 50megs.com, etc, etc.... not to mention small specialty sites
           | like em411.com. All that content/history, just poof.
        
             | qingcharles wrote:
             | They found the Vine archives recently. Doesn't mean they'll
             | get uploaded as Musk wants the new Vine to just be AI
             | waifus. But the files still exist on a disk or tape
             | somewhere.
             | 
             | I just remembered Orkut. Though I suspect Google has
             | backups or Orkut and Google+ somewhere. I wonder if Yahoo
             | Answers is still on a tape somewhere?
        
           | portaouflop wrote:
           | I link to a lot of stuff on my personal website and every
           | month i check the links. About a dozen or so are dead every
           | month, many on YouTube too.
           | 
           | I now adopted the practice of recovering the texts I deem
           | worthy from way back machine and downloading all yt videos I
           | really like locally.
           | 
           | But ofc one day I'll also hit the bucket; still have to work
           | out a contingency plan for my archive for that ...
        
       | defrost wrote:
       | I had exposure to TIFF files shortly after the format creation in
       | 1985/86, before the final form specification in 1992.
       | 
       | Not mentioned in either the article or the tail end wikipedia
       | article iamge was the early adoption of TIFF by the mapping and
       | geodetic community to store raster line data (maps, images, _and_
       | raw sat and instrument platform multichannel line data).
       | 
       | The tagging format made the embedding of spheroids, datums,
       | projections, origins, lens and focal specifications relatively
       | easy (plus or minus the usual Tower of Babel Tag Naming and
       | Meaning Confusion).
        
       | andrehacker wrote:
       | Am I missing something ?
       | 
       | The article is great but the web site is supposedly related to a
       | book "inventing the future".. which is nowhere to be found. Other
       | than a big, slowly loading graphic, 3 posts and indexes for the
       | book... the site doesn't provide a clue about where to acquire
       | the actual (PDF only?) book.
       | 
       | I assume you have to sign up to find out more ?
       | 
       | On the web I can only find articles about the book.
       | 
       | So.. what is the deal in making the actual book hard to find ?
       | 
       | Edit: I think I cracked the code: Click Home, Open "Close Your
       | Rings" article, scroll all the way down, find link:
       | https://books.by/john-buck?ref=inventingthefuture.ghost.io
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | hi andre, thanks for the feedback. there is a url link within
         | the article to the book which uses a new self publishing method
         | called books.by
        
           | andrehacker wrote:
           | Ah, I see, okay.
           | 
           | Based on the quality of the article, the subject matter of
           | the book being right in the center of my wheelhouse and the
           | references I could find on the internet, I just ordered a
           | copy (apparently a paper copy), look forward reading it.
        
         | OisinMoran wrote:
         | I had a similar issue, clicking the author's name gets you to a
         | decent page, but yeah I'd actually prefer if he made it a bit
         | easier to buy the book! I'll have to get it now after such a
         | nice article
        
           | hellojohnbuck wrote:
           | i didn't want to push the book too hard, given the tone of
           | the story. thanks for the feedback.
        
             | OisinMoran wrote:
             | That makes perfect sense, you're a gent.
             | 
             | This page [0] still links to (when clicking the main image)
             | an oddish seeming corner of your site that mentions
             | purchasing the book but has no link to it
             | 
             | [0] https://inventingthefuture.ghost.io/
        
       | scriptweaver wrote:
       | It's so inspiring to see someone spend years uncovering the real
       | people behind tech we use every day. This kind of dedication
       | keeps our digital history alive.
        
       | kuil009 wrote:
       | nunmulnage gamdongjeogieossseubnida.
        
         | Timwi wrote:
         | Translation: "It was so moving that I cried."
        
       | tianshuo wrote:
       | Thank you John Buck for this article, it is so interesting to
       | read how something so common was invented. RIP Mr Tiff
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | thank you
        
       | Nio1024 wrote:
       | Respect to those unsung engineers who made such lasting
       | contributions, and to the author as well. This kind of work is
       | not easy, but truly meaningful. I do have a question, though:
       | shouldn't the creation of industry standards also allow
       | individual attribution, similar to how patents credit inventors?
        
       | lanyard-textile wrote:
       | :) Pleased to see the wikipedia change landed without drama. It's
       | still there as of writing.
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | i crossed my fingers for the first 24 hours but i now think
         | admins and mod, to their credit, understand it's the truth.
        
           | DroneBetter wrote:
           | the article shows scans of the research reports listing only
           | Carlsen as their author, you could have just linked to one in
           | the first paragraph of the Wikipedia page to support his sole
           | inventorhood, right
        
       | burnto wrote:
       | Beautiful essay. So much of the tech we use today originates from
       | quiet humble builders and creators like Mr TIFF.
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | thanks for the response burnto
        
       | csar wrote:
       | Me: "This link can't possibly be about what I think it might be
       | about." Me, seconds later: "Yes it is!!"
        
       | jack1243star wrote:
       | Please do not let my comment take away your enjoyment of the
       | article.
       | 
       | I hate to nit-pick on such a beautiful story but that it ended
       | with a faux-Ghibli profile picture is just sad.
       | 
       | How can someone working so hard to humanize technology and
       | preserve history, justify this soul-less commodification of art?
       | Do the animators deserve to get treated as anonymous model
       | trainers without their consent, names and frames lost in a dead
       | ocean of bit-vectors?
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | my kids made the avatar so...sorry if it triggers
        
           | jack1243star wrote:
           | I understand, and I apologize for the rant.
           | 
           | Thank you for all the efforts that went into preserving the
           | memories of those that built the world around us.
        
       | 4ndrewl wrote:
       | The great thing about TIF was it's extensibility. Flexible (data
       | could be stored as tiles or in stripes), multiple compression
       | options etc.
       | 
       | Well documented spec, easy to bolt on extras either as public
       | tags - GeoTIFFs added projection metadata - or private, for your
       | own needs.
       | 
       | Back in the day, to improve a desktop application's performance I
       | found it was simple to create a custom reader and writer to
       | handle cases where tiles were completely one single colour
       | removing the need to decompress at run time.
       | 
       | Thank you TIFf!
        
         | sllabres wrote:
         | And the (early) availability of well made library, LibTIFF by
         | Sam Leffler. I used it extensively from 1995 on, but only found
         | out that according to Wikipedia is dates back to 1988!
        
         | flomo wrote:
         | Perhaps the greatest thing about TIFF, but also the most
         | horrible things, and probably why TIFF is mostly historical. It
         | was so extendable that no two programs ever accepted the exact
         | same TIFF extensions. (omitting the war story)
         | 
         | edit: forgot about byte order...
        
           | yread wrote:
           | But most of these variations were part of the spec
           | (endianness with II or MM, later magic 43 for bigTIFF 64bit
           | extension). I work with tiff and tiff-derived formats in
           | digital microscopy where its very much not historical. And
           | the alternatives (DICOM supp 145, vendor-specific garbage ...
           | and thats it) are worse.
           | 
           | I quite like the format, the only thing I would change is to
           | have the option not to store directory information in a
           | linked list spread throughout the file but in a simple array.
           | Duplicate it at the beginning and end of the file and you've
           | got resilience too (important in the age of floppies)
        
           | piltboy wrote:
           | TIFF is still very much alive in certain circles, see for
           | example https://cogeo.org/ The format is basically a TIFF
           | file with attached georeferencing information and with the
           | data organized by geographical sector, enabling fast
           | downloads of regional subsets.
        
             | geokon wrote:
             | I'm not super knowledgeable about this stuff.. but out of
             | curiosity, what advantage does it have over NetCDF?
             | 
             | I wrote a program processing GeoTIFF data. When I had
             | started this project I chose GeoTIFF mostly b/c i wanted
             | something simple. And I could load them in to Java's
             | BufferImage class and manipulate them that way. But it
             | seems all the pros exclusively use NetCDF and GeoTiffs are
             | for noobs (working with atmospheric science data here)
             | 
             | GeoTIFF does extend "images" to cover more usecases, but a
             | lot of stuff doesn't fit (like say a wind vector) and then
             | you need some other container or metadata b/c you generally
             | have many images. So I get the sense the complexity just
             | ends up being moved elsewhere.
        
               | piltboy wrote:
               | Generally speaking I would classify TIFF and its variants
               | as imaging formats (or for very simple numerical
               | datasets), and NetCDF as more suited for raw data, in
               | particular multi-dimensional data with time series, etc.
               | 
               | For forecast and climatological data I find NetCDF is
               | vastly superior, but also much more complicated to work
               | with due to the capabilities and how open the format is.
               | Just have a look at the complexity of the CF Conventions
               | to see what I mean: https://cfconventions.org/cf-
               | conventions/release/v1.12.0/cf-...
               | 
               | For visualizing orthophotos and the like, I would choose
               | GeoTIFF any day of the week, as they're easy to visualize
               | across platforms using existing libraries. Using COGs you
               | also get the functionality of a spatial index within each
               | GeoTIFF file, meaning that you can stream subsets of
               | GeoTIFF files without having to scan through the entire
               | file for each request.
        
             | abram wrote:
             | The Adobe DNG standard for raw camera images is based on
             | TIFF as well. DNG is used in lots of places, including the
             | raw capture support built into all modern iOS and Android
             | smartphones.
             | 
             | I've been using both TIFF and DNG this very week in my work
             | (https://filmlabapp.com), so I was happy to read this post
             | and learn about Steve Carlsen aka Mr. TIFF, whose work
             | we're still building on 39 years later.
        
               | mark-r wrote:
               | Not only DNG, but I think most (maybe all?) raw camera
               | files are based on TIFF.
        
               | buildbot wrote:
               | Not the .IA files from old Sinar digital backs! Those are
               | based on DOOM PWADs (lol). But otherwise mostly yes this
               | is true for nearly every other format as far as I am
               | aware.
        
               | omoikane wrote:
               | The top 3 (Canon, Sony, Nikon) are all based on TIFF, and
               | that accounts for the majority of the market share.
               | Search for "TIFF-based" here:
               | 
               | https://exiftool.org/#supported
        
           | wiredfool wrote:
           | This is why some people consider TIFF to stand for "Thousands
           | of Incompatible File Formats".
        
           | flufluflufluffy wrote:
           | We have hundreds of thousands of TIFF files where I work
           | which are scans of questionnaires filled out by clinical
           | trial participants. The one annoying thing is that web
           | browsers don't natively display them. I did some incredibly
           | inefficient JavaScript bs to decode the pixel data, plop it
           | in a canvas, get a PNG data url from it, and set that as the
           | src for an img element xD (why not just display the canvas?
           | because I was too lazy to manually handle resizes...) good
           | times
        
         | blacklion wrote:
         | Unfortunately, it doesn't help.
         | 
         | Almost any digital camera RAW format is TIFF inside. And you
         | can see how much kludges good metadata library needs to read
         | all of them: offsets from the IFD, offsets from beginning of
         | file with or without header, offsets from fields in IFD, etc,
         | etc, etc. You take TIFF, you change header to make your format,
         | and then you cannot implement this TIFF properly!
         | 
         | Even DNG (which is tiff inside) is mangled by camera firmware
         | authors!
        
       | TacticalCoder wrote:
       | Back when I was working in the book publishing industry (writing
       | and typesetting computer books using Quark XPress [1] on the old
       | MacOS [version 7, 8 and 9 IIRC], before Adobe's _InDesign_ [2]
       | ruled the earth), TIFF was all the rage. Probably still is.
       | 
       | I think the reason TIFF was so prevalent was it already had
       | support for CMYK color space (even though many books were printed
       | in black and white) and for lossless compression (as TFA
       | mentions).
       | 
       | It was a "one size fits all" format and so our 100 or 250 MB (!)
       | Zip drives [3] exchanged between authors/publisher/typesetters
       | often contained TIFF files.
       | 
       | > For as long as I have published my books, one of my overarching
       | goals was to give credit to those who actually invented the
       | hardware and software that we use.
       | 
       | So thank you Mr. Stephen "TIFF" Carlsen!
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QuarkXPress
       | 
       | [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adobe_InDesign
       | 
       | [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zip_drive
        
       | flancian wrote:
       | I had downloaded the final Aldus TIFF specifications document,
       | hoping to find the author's name. However, the name is seemingly
       | written in white text on white paper - making it invisible. What?
       | 
       | Is there an explanation for this that I missed? Was it an Easter
       | Egg left by the author?
        
         | mananaysiempre wrote:
         | Just as a side note, there are two versions of tiff6.pdf
         | (titled "TIFF, Revision 6.0, Final -- June 3, 1992") on the
         | 'net: one[1] that mentions Aldus on the title page and one[2]
         | that mentions Adobe. Only the Aldus one has the invisitext.
         | (Curiously, the metadata says it's newer.)
         | 
         | [1] SHA256: dbcdf729182937ecff415dfd06806894bf03bfd741291aa3ad7
         | ba45335673def, modify date 2002-05-10, created by Acrobat
         | Distiller 4.05 for Windows, e.g.
         | https://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/com16/tiff-fx/docs/tiff6.pd...
         | 
         | [2] SHA256: 8cb1e1a2226e423ba8b88f57366a30ef1b7ad6109443ebdda07
         | 2b952739a8d76, modify date 1995-09-14, created by Acrobat
         | Distiller 2.1 for Power Macintosh, e.g.
         | https://download.osgeo.org/libtiff/doc/TIFF6.pdf
        
         | EvanAnderson wrote:
         | I've found a number of hidden items in PDFs masked in the same
         | way. The one that comes to mind immediately are Dell product
         | code names hiding in official spec PDFs. (The PowerConnect
         | 6200-series switches are "Kinnick", for example.) I always
         | assumed it was a lazy redaction method and people weren't
         | necessarily aware the text wasn't actually redacted.
        
       | b2ccb2 wrote:
       | His obituary is lovely:
       | https://www.mountainviewtacoma.com/obituaries/stephen-carlse...
        
         | throw0101d wrote:
         | [...]              "Time flies like the wind.         Fruit
         | flies like bananas."              "What's the answer to Life,
         | the Universe, and Everything? 42."
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | Sillepses are always great.
        
       | quitit wrote:
       | Quietly thankful that the spec author didn't proclaim that we've
       | been mispronouncing "TIFF" all these years.
        
         | BigTTYGothGF wrote:
         | The "TI" is really "Tl" and is a voiceless alveolar lateral
         | affricate.
        
           | quitit wrote:
           | I tried to pronounce it, but summoned a daemon instead
        
           | throw0101d wrote:
           | TIL:
           | 
           | * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voiceless_alveolar_lateral_af
           | f...
        
       | sethx wrote:
       | Beautiful
        
         | hellojohnbuck wrote:
         | thank you sethx
        
       | emmett013 wrote:
       | I see you played the NYT Connections on 11/4.
        
       | cod1r wrote:
       | Oh man, this is a really nice ending to his story. I'm glad this
       | happened.
        
       | noisy_boy wrote:
       | I have a habit of filling my head with all kinds of
       | trivia/information. Sometimes I think this is a useless habit.
       | 
       | Not today. I will try to remember the name of Mr. Stephen Carlsen
       | as the inventor of TIFF format as long as I can. As a mediocre
       | programmer, it is the least amount of respect I can pay for an
       | unsung but talented engineer of an era that is fast going past
       | us.
        
       | echelon_musk wrote:
       | I'll admit that the only time I ever interacted with a TIFF file
       | was the buffer overflow exploit in the PSP Photo Viewer. RIP Mr.
       | TIFF.
       | 
       | https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/PSP/Homebrew_History?useskin=v...
        
       | everydayentropy wrote:
       | Nice read. It was touching and it's great that credit is given
       | where credit is due now.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-11-05 23:01 UTC)