Image size vs file size

Hello,
I would very much appreciate an answer to the follwing: When I save a file to jpeg the image size in photoshop remains the same as it was as a tiff file BUT according to the information that comes up in windows properties the file is much smaller (300k vs 2.9mg). Can you advise me which is the correct file size? If the correct size is the one showing in windows (300K) does mean that the file compressed in JPG and lost a lot of information? and if this is the case how can I prevent that from happening and still save the file as a JPG? [ I would like the image to remain the size photoshop shows it to be] . Thank you very much.

The file size of the JPG on disk is 300kb this is because it is heavily compressed.
The file size shown in Photoshop is uncompressed and appears at the larger size.
Yes, compressing loses information but it may not lose much quality the first time it is compressed.
To minimise data loss use a compressed TIFF format.
Or stop worrying about file size – storage space is cheap!
The only time JPEGs should be used is for display on the web.
In fact for general use in Adobe applications, the PSD format is fine. (As long as it lasts! )

Similar Messages

Stop images from losing file size when scaled down?

Ive read this tutorial;
http://joedasilva.com/blog/?p=32
and ive just found out that if you scale an image smaller,
the file size is permanently decreased, and enlarging the image
again will make it pixalated. If im working with images and I want
a lot of freedom to play around with the scaling, do I need to
convert them all to grafics?
Is there a setting I can change so that the images are saved
at the display resolution when I export them, but maintain there
full file size when in the document? Is this how illustrator works?
thanks

quote:
Originally posted by:
jdldn
Ive read this tutorial;
http://joedasilva.com/blog/?p=32
and ive just found out that if you scale an image smaller,
the file size is permanently decreased, and enlarging the image
again will make it pixalated. If im working with images and I want
a lot of freedom to play around with the scaling, do I need to
convert them all to grafics?
Is there a setting I can change so that the images are saved
at the display resolution when I export them, but maintain there
full file size when in the document? Is this how illustrator works?
thanks
There is no such a thing as a "grafic." In your Fireworks
document, you can have bitmap objects and vector objects. Bitmap
objects, such a photographs, are rectangular objects with detailed
information, where the color and transparency of each pixel is
specified. Vector objects are mathematical objects, where the shape
is determined by nodes and the color is determined by the fill
type. You cannot convert a bitmap object to a vector object
(although you can sometimes create a vector illustration that
resembles a photograph).
If you are still experimenting with your design, what you can
do is add a layer with your original-sized bitmap objects. Put this
layer at the bottom of your stack and keep it hidden. Then, anytime
you feel a need to refresh an object that you've resized too many
times, copy that object from your originals layer. It may not be a
perfect solution, but it should help you.
I've never had a problem with multiply resizing photos,
myself, because I design my layouts with vector shapes first. Once
I have all my proportions set,
then I add any photos I have. With this worflow, I know what
size to make my photos. Of course, I might change my mind, later,
but my process keeps me on track.

Reduce image quality (and file size)

Is there a simple way to reduce the quality of all backgroung
images ? (there are all bitmap images, about 3 MB each of them)
I imagine that by reducing the image quality, the file size
will be less huge...
But I wasn't able to find a way to do that...
(the option about JPEG quality in project/preferences has no
effect, because all background images are bitmap... )
Any idea is welcome !
Valérie

Hi Valerie
I have been doing some research on this -- the issue of file
size (relating to both .cp and .swf) crops up a lot on this forum,
so I wanted to find out which were the critical factors relating to
images.
My findings show that there are two critical factors:
-- Slide Properties: Quality (High, Standard, JPEG,
Optimized)
-- Format of original image file (used for slide background
or inserted image object)
To summarize the results of my testing:
Slide Quality
Changing the slide quality from High
to Standard or JPEG makes little or no difference to the size of
the .cp file but can *significantly* reduce the size of the
.swf
This is an especially useful way of
dealing with the very large .swf file sizes caused by importing PPT
slides
A .swf consisting entirely of
imported PPT slides with complex backgrounds may be reduced to less
than 10% of its original size by changing the quality setting for
each of the slides to JPEG and using a JPEG image quality setting
of 75%.
Format of original image file
For complex images such as photos,
the best image file format to use is (oddly) .bmp -- although it
results in a larger .cp file than other file formats (such as .jpg
or .png), it generates the smallest .swf output.
The benefit of using the .bmp format
is less marked if you have set slide quality to Standard instead of
High, but it can still cut the file size of the .swf output by up
to 50%
For slides using a quality setting of
JPEG, there appears to be no difference in resulting .swf file size
between .bmp or any other image file format
A final comment: it is interesting to compare the size of the
.cp and resulting .swf for different Captivate projects. There is
typically an assumption that the .swf file will be smaller due to
compression. However, this is not always the case. For example, I
tested one project that used High slide quality and images that had
been inserted from .jpg files -- the generated .swf file was over 4
times larger than the .cp file. However, when I changed the quality
setting for all slides to JPEG, the .swf file reduced to less than
50% of the size of the .cp file.
I hope this information is helpful -- please contact me if
you'd like to see the detailed test data.
Best regards,
-Matthew Ellison

After duplicate operation, file sizes(Checkpoint file size) are different

HI
I have a some questions.
We are testing a 4-way Replication. After duplicate operation, file sizes(Checkpoint file size) are different in OS command(du -sh).
Is the normal?
TimesTen Version : TimesTen Release 7.0.5.0.0 (64 bit Solaris)
OS Version : SunOS 5.10 Generic_141414-02 sun4u sparc SUNW,SPARC-Enterprise
[TEST17A] side
[TEST17A] /mmdb/DataStore # du -sh ./*
6.3G ./SAMPLE
410M ./SAMPLE_LOG
[TEST17A] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ls -lrt
total 13259490
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 501 Aug 14 2008 SAMPLE.inval
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091428864 Jan 29 02:13 SAMPLE.ds1
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4113014784 Jan 29 02:23 SAMPLE.ds0
[TEST17A] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ttisql sample
Command> dssize ;
PERM_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 8388608
PERM_IN_USE_SIZE: 36991
PERM_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 36991
TEMP_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 524288
TEMP_IN_USE_SIZE: 5864
TEMP_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 6757
[TEST17B] side
[TEST17B] /mmdb/DataStore # du -sh ./*
911M ./SAMPLE
453M ./SAMPLE_LOG
[TEST17B] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ls -lrt
total 1865410
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 334 Dec 11 2008 SAMPLE.inval
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091422064 Jan 29 02:25 SAMPLE.ds1
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091422064 Jan 29 02:25 SAMPLE.ds0
[TEST17B] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ttisql sample
Command> dssize;
PERM_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 8388608
PERM_IN_USE_SIZE: 432128
PERM_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 432128
TEMP_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 524288
TEMP_IN_USE_SIZE: 5422
TEMP_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 6630
[TEST18A] side
[TEST18A] /mmdb/DataStore # du -sh ./*
107M ./SAMPLE
410M ./SAMPLE_LOG
[TEST18A] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ls -lrt
total 218976
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091422064 Jan 29 02:22 SAMPLE.ds0
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091422064 Jan 29 02:32 SAMPLE.ds1
[TEST18A] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ttisql sample
Command> dssize;
PERM_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 8388608
PERM_IN_USE_SIZE: 36825
PERM_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 37230
TEMP_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 524288
TEMP_IN_USE_SIZE: 6117
TEMP_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 7452
[TEST18B] side
[TEST18B] /mmdb/DataStore # du -sh ./*
107M ./SAMPLE
411M ./SAMPLE_LOG
[TEST18B] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ls -lrt
total 218976
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091422064 Jan 29 02:18 SAMPLE.ds1
-rw-rw-rw- 1 timesten other 4091422064 Jan 29 02:28 SAMPLE.ds0
[TEST18B] /mmdb/DataStore/SAMPLE # ttisql sample
Command> dssize;
PERM_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 8388608
PERM_IN_USE_SIZE: 36785
PERM_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 37140
TEMP_ALLOCATED_SIZE: 524288
TEMP_IN_USE_SIZE: 5927
TEMP_IN_USE_HIGH_WATER: 7199
Thank you very much.
GooGyum

You don't really give much detail on what operations were performed and in what sequence (e.g. duplicate from where to where...) nor if there was any workload running when you did the duplicate. In general checkpoint file sizes amongst replicas will not be the same / remain the same because:
1. Replicas are logical replicas not physical replicas. Replication transfers logical operations and applies logical operations and even if you try and do exactly the same thing at both sides in exactly the same order there are internal operations etc. that are not necessarily synchronised which will cause the size of the files to vary somewhat.
2. The size of the file as reported by 'ls -l' represents the maximum offset that has so far been written to in the file but the current 'usage' of the file may be less than this at present.
3. Checkpoint files are 'sparse' files (unless created with PreAllocate=1) and so the space used as reported by 'du' will in general not correspond ot the size of the file as reported by 'ls -l'.
Unless you are seeing some kind of problem I would not be concerned at an apparent difference in size.
Chris

How to increase image size by file size?A

I'm submitting photos to a stock site that requires a file size of 50 MB per image.
Is there a way to increase file size to match exactly 50 MB? What I've been doing is trying to guess the size of the image in pixels until it reaches 50 MB but that's not as intuitive.
Also, what's the best way to increase the image size without too much degradation?
Thanks!

Thanks for the answer.. what's the best way to increase the file size while preserving image quality? Should I just do it in one go or increase it multiple times until I reach 50 MB?
I also noticed that although it said 50 MB in the image size window, once the file was saved and I looked up its info. it was slightly larger.. ?

How can I batch resize images to a file size of 1 meg?

I'm not the most technically literate mac user and would gratefully receive any help please.
I have been asked to reduce lots of images of various large file sizes and dimensions to 1 meg. I am using Photoshop CS4 and am aware of the 'Image Processor' function under 'scripts' unfortunately it only allows me to adjust the image dimensions, but I need to reduce the file size so that every image is 1 meg and at 300 dpi, it doesn't matter about the image dimensions.
Thanks so much!
Jess

You omitted to name the file format you want to use.
If you use any compression the task is far less trivial than you might think.
Trying to predict the effect of the compression (even if it were non-destructive) is not always sensible so the viable approach may be to save, check file size, if above intended one change dimensions, save, check file size etc.
I think I have come across thread/s on this in the Scripting Forum but I can’t remember anyone ever posting a finalised Script for this.

Problem exporting image to specific file size

I've had some professional images shot and I can see from the file size in Aperture that they range from 13 - 73 mb. I need to submit them as 72dpi and 300dpi files and they must be between 1 & 3 mb in size.
I'm having no problems in exporting them at the correct dpi but the file sizes come out between 451kb and 1.8kb: 3 of the 6 images are too small, ie under 1mb.
What I'm doing is 'export version', then choosing the preset option of 'jpeg original size', editing it to the dpi I want, setting the image quality at a max of 12.
How can I get these file sizes to be bigger?
Thanks, and please help me quickly because I've a submission deadline approaching!

Well that's interesting Ernie. I did as you said, but also exported an image while I had the settings at 4288 x 4288 pixels. The resultant file size at that setting is 1.4MB. The file size when I went back to 'original size' is 795KB, exactly the same as before.
So I thought - if I can go above original size in that way, then can I alter the % to be over 100? I tried at 150%, which it accepted, and I've now got a file size of 1.3MB.
So I guess I've got what I wanted - not that I really understand it, because 'original size' clearly isn't original size at all!
Sorry Leonie - I didn't answer your question - they haven't given me a specification for pixel size as in 4288 x 4288: only 300 & 72dpi, a file size of 1-3MB, and a they must be JPGs.
And thanks for your help Frank - I've tried starting out with JPGs and with TIFFs as the photographer supplied me with both. I'd cropped some of the images but not others. I appreciate you offer of having a go with my images, but I think that - as I can go to over 100% - I've got it sorted now! Just hope there's no deterioration in image quality.
Many thanks everyone!

Duplicating images with smaller file size

How do I duplicate an image with a reduced file size without exporting?

If you right-click (control-click) on an image, you have the option to:
1) Duplicate Version
2) New Version from Master
Whichever you choose, you're only creating an additional "preview" that the system uses for editing, sharing, etc. It does not "create" a completely new image. Thereby keeping storage overhead to a minimum.
I guess what might be a pertinent question is, what are you wanting to do with the image?
Cheers
Kent

InDesign Transparency Effects - Problems with Image Quality and File Size

Hello,
We are experiencing new problems exporting InDesign files to PDF.
To summarize, though our largest workflow is to create files for offset printing, we also deliver our work to PDF for mounting on a website so our clients can download directly from the web. Our new problem is Transparency Effects, and creating a PDF that will both have a high quality (or resolution), and be a small file size.
We are working with multiple page documents (24 to 48 pages), and would very much like to work with InDesign Transparency Effects. However, after spending much time testing a variety of PDF types, we are finding there is a radical difference between quality and file size. I was curious if anyone has had these problems, and if there is a simple answer. InDesign is an incredible program that allows us to design on the fly with Transparency Effects, but, if we are going to experience these problems, we will have to eliminate these wonderful tools.
Can you help me or lead me to information online that will help.
Thank you,
Lain

Please don't post in multiple forums. Your question has nothing to do with the PDF language and specifications, but rather PDF workflow or InDesign. I've responded to your other posting and am closing this thread.
- Dov

Library image labels - add file size

Library View expanded cell options - file size seems important enough a parameter to have as an option. Can I be the only one who uses that info?

No, it should be shown in many more areas, including in the Folders panel.
John

Vi memory size verses file size

I have a subvi that does not contain much code data block and front panel objects thus giving a total memory usage of 151kb as shown below. However the file size is almost 2 orders of magnitude bigger. What is the explanation of this?
I also tried to copy and paste diagram to a blank vi and that file was twice the size of the original.
Any idea as to what's causing the discrepancy in numbers and the large file size. I have some empty clusters going in and out of the subvi and I have an imaq create function within the subvi. But the numbers don't add up.
Below is the VI memory use and front diagram showing mostly empty objects. I'd upload the program itself but it's a bit large, hence the problem!
Thanks y'all!!!

I figured it out!!!
It's the "original image" constant that fed into the cluster. It was a constant I created off an image wire in another vi. I guess it carried over the image data when created. I deleted this constant and switched this to an "IMAQ create" function and viola, 35KB file now!!!
Thanks for all your help people. I think it might be advisable when displaying front and block diagram memory, that constants relating to IMAQ images were included. It's not readily identifiable unless you track down the culprit(s)
From this to this

Compressing images to keep file size down

I'm looking for a really useful feature that I remember using in powerpoint. Currently my files are HUGE because pages doesn't resize (mb wise) pictures when I scale them down. I could do it the hard way with Photoshop or take a screenshot and replace it, but that really ***** doing with more than four images. Any ideas??

Hello
Apple offers to all of us powerful tools but many of us miss them.
Some of them are named Folder Action Scripts.
Here is one of them with some changes.
--(SCRIPT Image - scale to half]
property done_foldername : "JPEG Images"
property originals_foldername : "Original Images"
property newimage_extension : "jpg"
-- the list of file types which will be processed
-- eg: {"PICT", "JPEG", "TIFF", "GIFf"}
property type_list : {"TIFF", "JPEG", "GIFf", "PICT"}
-- since file types are optional in Mac OS X,
-- check the name extension if there is no file type
-- NOTE: do not use periods (.) with the items in the name extensions list
-- eg: {"txt", "text", "jpg", "jpeg"}, NOT: {".txt", ".text", ".jpg", ".jpeg"}
property extension_list : ¬
{"tif", "tiff", "jpg", "jpeg", "gif", "pict", "pct"}
on adding folder items to this_folder after receiving these_items
tell application "Finder"
if not (exists folder done_foldername of this_folder) then
make new folder at this_folder ¬
with properties {name:done_foldername}
end if
set the results_folder to ¬
(folder done_foldername of this_folder) as alias
if not (exists folder originals_foldername of this_folder) then
make new folder at this_folder ¬
with properties {name:originals_foldername}
set current view of container window of ¬
this_folder to list view
end if
set the originals_folder to ¬
folder originals_foldername of this_folder
end tell
try
repeat with i from 1 to number of items in these_items
set this_item to item i of these_items
set the item_info to the info for this_item
if (alias of the item_info is false and ¬
the file type of the item_info is in the type_list) or ¬
(the name extension of the item_info is in ¬
the extension_list) then
tell application "Finder"
my resolveconflicts(thisitem, originals_folder, "")
set the new_name to ¬
my resolveconflicts(thisitem, ¬
results_folder, newimage_extension)
set the source_file to (move this_item to ¬
the originals_folder with replacing) as alias
end tell
processitem(sourcefile, new_name, results_folder)
end if
end repeat
on error error_message number error_number
if the error_number is not -128 then
tell application "Finder"
activate
display dialog error_message ¬
buttons {"Cancel"} default button 1 ¬
giving up after 120
end tell
end if
end try
end adding folder items to
on resolveconflicts(thisitem, target_folder, new_extension)
tell application "Finder"
set the file_name to the name of this_item
set file_extension to the name extension of this_item
if the file_extension is "" then
set the trimmed_name to the file_name
else
set the trimmed_name to ¬
text 1 thru -((length of file_extension) + 2) of ¬
the file_name
end if
if the new_extension is "" then
set target_name to file_name
set target_extension to file_extension
else
set target_extension to new_extension
set target_name to ¬
(the trimmed_name & "." & target_extension) as string
end if
if (exists document file target_name of target_folder) then
set the name_increment to 1
repeat
set the new_name to (the trimmed_name & "." & ¬
(name_increment as string) & "." & ¬
target_extension) as string
if not (exists document file new_name of ¬
the target_folder) then
-- rename to conflicting file
set the name of document file target_name of ¬
the target_folder to the new_name
exit repeat
else
set the name_increment to the name_increment + 1
end if
end repeat
end if
end tell
return the target_name
end resolve_conflicts
-- this sub-routine processes files
on processitem(sourcefile, new_name, results_folder)
-- NOTE that the variable this_item is a file reference in alias format
-- FILE PROCESSING STATEMENTS GOES HERE
try
(* the target path is the destination folder and the new file name *)
set the target_path to ((results_folder as string) & ¬
new_name) as string
with timeout of 900 seconds
tell application "Image Events"
launch -- always use with Folder Actions
set this_image to open file (source_file as string)
scale this_image by factor 0.5
save this_image as JPEG in file target_path with icon
close this_image
end tell
end timeout
on error error_message
tell application "Finder"
activate
display dialog error_message ¬
buttons {"Cancel"} default button 1 ¬
giving up after 120
end tell
end try
end process_item
-- [/SCRIPT]
Search for Folder Action in the Mac OS Help to get explanations about the way this kind of script is used.
Drag and Drop a picture file on a folder to which this script is attached will divide the picture's dimensions by two which means a size divided by four.
I often uses it before posting screen shots here.
Yvan KOENIG (from FRANCE mardi 18 mars 2008 17:20:55)

Image dimensions and file size, why the change?

Here's a Friday puzzler for ya
I just ran a batch on a couple of thousand orthophoto images (RGB + 1 alpha channel geo-tif) to add some typographic information to the bottom of each image. All the files were saved in PS as flattened, standard uncompressed tif. EVERY image is 10k x 10k pixels. After the process we noticed that the new set of files were consistently smaller than the original images! Not by much mind you, but with this kind of spatially mapped imagery it makes you wonder if we are missing anything:
before: 720013700.tif = 381 MB = 390,704kb (400,080,750 bytes), size on disk 381 MB (400,080,896 bytes)
after: 720013700_DRAFT.tif = 381 MB = 390,648kb (400,023,280 bytes), size on disk 381 MB (400,023,552 bytes)
So my supervisor asks "why"? and that leads me here. I thought about a few answers - 1) pixel values changes for white text take up less space? 2) No geo-tif header information written back to the file (that's a separate step after the PS batch using another app), so we'll know about that one. 3) Bit fairies took the 56kb.
Any ideas?

You say uncompressed… So you didn't select any compression at all during the save of the TIFF files? If not, white text replacing image data couldn't have changed the size by itself.
You mentioned geo-tif header information... Was this header in the file before you opened it with Photoshop?
I don't really know the internal format of a TIFF file; perhaps Chris Cox can say something about this.
-Noel

Help, mostly with rendering size, not file size, actual size

I made a short 4 second movie in after effects cs5, there are really no fancy effects, just a car with wheels turning driving across the screen, the size is super small at 167px width x 315px height. It's 30 fps. It's from a set of three, I have no major issues with the other two but for some reason, when I render this one, it comes out super blurry/pixelated and the size is twice of what it should be, it's not too size of how I built it, and I can't resize it. I think it looks so bad because it isn't coming out the right size, but I can not for the life of me figure out why. This is for my job, and I have to show it to the higher ups so I need it to look as crisp as possible. Any ideas what would make this happen? I've rendered so many different times, i brought it into Adobe media encoder, I feel like I am just missing some little switch, but can't find it. I render quicktime as an animation, it's so small, it doesn't matter if I do animation. I've tried at the default settings of best and lossless, I've changed things, I am not sure what else I should do, anybody have any insight? I can provide more info if needed, thanks so much in advanced!

167x315 is your comp size for all three comps and you know this absolutely.
Your render settings are exactly the same for each of the three comps and you know this absolutely.
You shoudl be able to examine the properties of the output movies by either brining them back into AE or using the inspector in QT. Each will show a movie size and a display size. A tiny movie, like 167x315, will look awful if played at normal viewing size of 640x480 because it will be scaled up by twice, each pixel will be four times its native size. That can happen when a flag gets set in QT to display a movie at full screen size which is different from the falge that sets it to display full size.
Double check everything.
You shoudl be able to render out comp 1, which is good, and then dleete everything in comp 1 and fill it up with stuff copied and pasted out of comp 3. Then you use the exact same render settings again.

Reduce FILE size, but not IMAGE size

pardon the blasphemy, but on windows, Paint lets you "stretch" an image to 99%, which reduces the size of the image practically not at all but reduces the file size big time, you know like a 600kb file reduced to 99% the size of the originals ends up at 60kb, or whatever, but is only a few pixels smaller in size. How would i do that on my mac? tried the export thing, but if you reduce size a few pixels, you get bigger file size... know what i'm asking?
MacBookPro Mac OS X (10.4.8)

I discovered Edit>Constrain>Custom>Crop>Export (give it a size in pixels). Reduces size and file size.
Self answered.

Image size vs file size

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for