To achieve better quality would this be a good option.

You can work on the TIFF if needed without loss and then save.
Am I right about this?

My normal workflow is to make all my changes in TIF, then when I'm ready to submit, I batch process the TIFF files through Neat Image and save them as a JPG in Neat Image.  The next step is upload to the site.  This ensures they get the best possible JPG I can offer.  Sometimes I have to make some minor changes to the filtered file but most of the time I don't.

Why not just PSD and JPEG?

I'm sure opinions will vary but my thoughts are that I want to be able to store and market my images over time.  A TIFF is timeless.  A JPG is timeless.  Both are widely accepted around the world and will not go away in the next 5 or 10 years.  PSD is specific to Photoshop.  I don't know if I'll be using Photoshop in the next 5 years - how many designers are still using Quark over Photoshop?

I also don't go from a PSD to a JPG because I want the very last thing I do to an image to get filtered for noise - thus I allow the noise filtration software to do the conversion.  I've also noticed that Neat Image will sometimes exploit errors that I didn't see in Photoshop so I'll have to go back in and re-adjust a couple of things on the TIFF, then re-process.

It's all in the process you like and your personal opinions 

I want the very last thing I do to an image to get filtered for noise

Why do you do it this way? Everything I've read and heard indicates noise should be handled first.

My normal workflow is to make all my changes in TIF, then when I'm ready to submit, I batch process the TIFF files through Neat Image and save them as a JPG in Neat Image. 

Wow, you batch process with NeatImage? I find that applying NeatImage to an entire image really screws up the sharpness, i have to do it selectively in layers to only filter out noise in the parts of the image where there is noise! And each image needs different amounts of noise reduction! Wish list: D200 where I can shoot at ISO 100, my D70 only goes down to 200 (what were they thinking?).

But I do agree that noise needs to be handled last... unless the occasion arises where the noise reduction dulls down the sharpness in a spot or two and then I have to go in and sharpen that area last.  I agree, most operations on an image can increase noise, especially saturation.

Mr. Leonard - wrong and right are subjective when the question relates to the arts 

you state: "you can also just change your image to Lab color in PS and apply some gaussian blur to the a and b channels...this gets rid of a lot of digital color noise. Any adjustments you are doing doesn't add 'noise', though it can accentuate any noise that is there (especially sharpening)"

So basically what you are doing is blurring the noise out with gaussian blur, then re-sharpening the blurred area by trying to sharpen the image?  Why are you making your life so difficult?

As I mentioned, it's all a matter of opinion - technically correct or not. I shoot in both RAW and JPG simultaneously.  If the JPG isn't good enough straight out of the camera, then any adjustments I make to an image as far as levels, lightness, sharpness, contrast, resizing, cropping, etc., etc. is done in RAW.  Very rarely do I do any adjustments to the image in PS unless I'm doing some cloning or healing brush work, replacing a background, isolating something, etc., etc.  I adjust in RAW, click OK, save as TIFF, save a thumbnail for my personal web site, then move on to Neat Image.  Again, it may not be "technically correct" in Photoshop, but there are those that argue that the image should be "technically correct" out of the camera 

For stuff to send to RM places that require TIFFs, or for images that will be saved later to be used in conjunction with other images, then I save as a TIFF through Neat Image.

There is a big difference between photography and design work which sometimes gets a little mixed up in the way stock has evolved.  If you are going to combine your images to make new ones (say overlay an isolated image of two hands shaking with a background of a corporate office building) then that is a completely different process - that is not photography, it's design (I'll get pounded on for those comments - no worries, I've got thick skin).  Because of my personal process (again, may not be technically correct) if I were to combine those two images in PS, then I wouldn't have to worry about much noise because of the way I process my images (the images have already been processed for noise prior to the creation of the "design").

Suwanneeredhead- I have a Canon 20d and a Canon 30d.  On the Neat Image homepage there are profiles for the 20d at different ISOs that do not sharpen the image when processed.  I really like that profile set and I can get away with batch processing the images on from the 20d - though I am sure to select the "fine tune" option when batch processing.  Hardly ever have problems with that profile set.

With the 30d, I'm still working on issues.  I've only had the camera about a month but the processing is a little different.  Most of the time, I get away with using the 20d profiles for the 30d and have no problems batch processing but sometimes I do have to go back and select an area and reprocess that way.

Basic 101 workflow rules : (seelctive) noise removal, adjustments (ALWAYS use layer adjustments for Levels etc., as they do not change the actual image,but save the adjustments in a new layer), then save as PSD.
You should also create a new layer with the sharpened version of an image...

Bit of a newbie question here ...

I understand that making adjustments in a different layer does not change the actual image. But then some agencies require that the images submitted have just one layer. So you have to combine the layers you've been working on ... and the image is changed, no?

So what's the advantage of working in layers?

Bit of a newbie question here ...

I understand that making adjustments in a different layer does not change the actual image. But then some agencies require that the images submitted have just one layer. So you have to combine the layers you've been working on ... and the image is changed, no?

So what's the advantage of working in layers?

As a final step, you need to combine all of the layers in order to generate a JPG.  But this should be saved to a separate file (as well as all other edits).  So the original image should stay the same.  But the new JPG has changed from the original.

The advantage to using layers, is that you can also save the layered file (once again as a separate file).  This will allow you to go back and tweak the image or make additional changes.