File size from save to spreadsheet

This may be more of a fundamental programming/computer science question (I'm a Mechanical Engineer) but I want to know just a general correlation between the number of data points created by the Save to Spreadsheet subVI and the size of the resulting text file. Assuming each data point has about 4-5 digits in it. The reason for this is I am creating a program that saves data as it collects (via producer/consumer), but if someone accidentally leaves it running and walks away bad things can happen. I want to be able to disable the save functionality after a certain number of points have been saved to prevent a massive text file from being created.
Thanks
Tim

If each number is 4-5 digits, then figure about 4-5 bytes per number, plus 1 for a delimiter, perhaps 1 for a decimal point. On the conservative side round up to 10 bytes per value.

Similar Messages

JPEG images opened in Photoshop double in file size upon save. Why?

I've noticed that jpeg files I open in Photoshop (fresh off the sansdisk card) pretty much double in file size (from, say, 3MB to 6MB) after they're saved. This occurs even if I don't change the image size at all and simply save as a jpeg after touching up the levels and sharpness (no major restorative work on the image at all).
Can anyone explain this to me?

JPG format saves disk space by using a coding scheme (called huffman) in which small numbers use fewer bits than small numbers. What is saved is differences between neigbor pixels (the idea being that there is usually much similarity between neighbor pixels). Smaller inter-neigbor differences need fewer bits than large differences. When you adjust tonality, the adjusted image most likely uses a bigger portion of the tonal range than the original image did, and the inter-neighbor differences are increased. A sharpness boost also increases differences between neighbor pixels, particularly so if you boost sharpness so much that noise is increased, and more bits are needed to store the differences.
Another thing is that when you open a JPG image into an image editor, the editor uncompresses the image. When you re-save it, you have to select a compression ratio, and it may not necessarily be the same ratio that the original was compressed with.
Best regards,
Antero

File sizes from MPEG to QuickTime to iDVD ?

I have about 8 Gig of MPEG files downloaded from a video camera. I needed to install ClipStream and buy the MPEG-2 add on from the Apple Store to be able to open these files. I picked a long file, that was a 1.8Gig file ( 39 minutes long. I suspect the camera may be HD. It's not mine. ) and when I converted it to QT the file length grew to 6.55Gig. Obviously, that won't fit on a single layer DVD. When I use iDVD or iMovie and then iDVD to create the final file, does it convert this to anther file type , which is much smaller ? What file type does iDVD save as ? I have access to Final Cut Express, at work. Would that be a better program for this project ?

Earlier versions of iMovie and iDVD were built around DV Stream (.dv) as their native video format, and so anything needed to be converted to that before editing or encoding. At roughly 13 gigs per hour of .dv footage, your 39 min mpeg file was uncompressed to about the right size.
Different editors can handle different video formats either natively or with conversion to another video codec. You could check and see if FCE can handle mpeg files without uncompressing the whole file, but unless you have DVD Studio Pro or Roxio Toast, you'll need to uncompress the video file so that iDVD can handle it.
All standard DVDs have their video encoded in a particular format, and their encoded files arranged in a particular way so that a DVD player doesn't have to be too smart for your DVD to play properly. The DVD standard is video formatted as an mpeg-2 file.
If you don't need to do any editing, you may want to consider Roxio Toast, or other software that can handle an mpeg-2 file without uncompressing and recompressing.
John

Huge file size with Save for Web but preview is ok

Hi,
I have googled but not found anything about this but I have the same problem on my computer and also on a colleagues computer so it seems it should not be totally unknown.
This is what i do
1 Open a eps file, one color logo, 72dpi, size it to 110x21
2 save for web
3 select png-24 format. preview says file size ~1.3 kB
4 save -> actual file size on disk is 4 kB (ie 3 times bigger file size than it should be)
5 Preview and then right click in browser + save image as gives correct file size (on my colleagues computer this does not work, he always gets the wrong size)
I have also tried with gif and various settings, image sizes etc and the result is the same.
I'm using Windows Vista 32-bit and Photoshop CS4.
Is this a known problem?
Thanks

Thanks for your reply but i don't think that's it. When I check properties on the file in Windows it tells both "Size" and "Size on disk", where the latter is actual size on disk (depending on cluster size) but the size I am talking about is the first one.
Also just to be clear, when I say Preview, I mean clicking the Preview button that opens the file in a browser window. Not the preview within the Save for Web and Devices dialog. So I think this file is correctly created and *should* be the same as if I click Save (but it obviously isn't)
This sounds very much like a bug to me, anyone else who have seen this or can recreate?
Thanks

Compressing file size from within a portfolio?

I've got 16 files within a PDF portfolio ranging from 80MB to 227Mb and I'm trying to compress them, the portfolio size is 1.41GB. When I view the file size in Bridge as I compress each file I don't see any change in the individual file sizes nor in the Portfolio size. Are the original files being compressed or are they stored seperately within the portfolio file? And any idea why the portfolio size nor the original file sizes are changing after PDF optimization?

Thanks, Leo.
To my mind, this looks about right : http://www.adobe.com/products/livecycle/pdfgenerator/
Do you know whether this will be suitable for integration into .net code?
Can it cover our needs (Concatenation, Compression, Bookmark-Editing)?

Significant reduction in file size from Camera Raw to DNG

Hi,
I am currently testing the conversion of Leaf camera raw files into DNGs for a photographer's archive. I am hoping to convert all of the mos files to DNGs because Leaf Capture and the Leaf Raw Converter are not being updated and because the photographer wants to have an Adobe centered workflow. In my testing I discovered that converting mos files to DNGs through ACR 8.4 and LightRoom 5.4 resulted in a reduction of file size by nearly 50%. A 44.5MB mos file became a 23.6MB DNG. From what I've read only about 15-20% of the camera raw file should be lost and all of the data lost should be propietary.
Here-in lies my quesiton, is there any way that I can track or determine exactly what sort of compression is being done to the mos file and what information is or is not travelling in the conversion to DNG?
These are the settings I have used for converting raw files to DNGs:
ACR:
JPEG Preview: Medium Size
Embed fast load data
Don't use lossy compression
Preserve pixel counts
Don't embed original
LIGHTROOM 5.4:
Only Convert Raw files
Delete originals after successful conversion
File Extension DNG
Compatibility Camera Raw 7.1 and later
Jpeg Preview Medium Size
Embed Fast Load Data
Thanks!

50%? - I thought we were talking about 15-20%?
In my first post I questioned why I was seeing a reduction in file size of 50% when according to forums and articles I've read I should only be seing a 15-20% reduction in file size. I then wondered what data I might be losing, which you addressed.
Same as what? - what were the results.
I was referring to testing I preformed on camera raw files produced during different years (all mos). I converted all files with the same ACR and LR settings and found that the DNGs always reflected a 50% reduction in file size. This test suggests that any conversion issues is not necessarily related to how the camera raw files might have been differently built across years.
Adobe's raw data compression is touted by DNG zealots, but I haven't scrutinized it enough to corroborate or refute.., but my experience is that reduction is relatively marginal. All of this assumes original is also compressed - if uncompressed in original source, savings would be large.
The files I am dealing with are definitely uncompressed which could account for the large reduction in file size. I didn't realize until I posted to this thread that converting to a DNG results in a compression of the original image data. I understand that this compression is supposed to be lossless like a lossless compression to a tiff and thus result in no decrease in image quality or harm to the original image. I am baffled by how it is possible that any compression of a file (especially by 50%) could not result in a loss of important data but I will accept that it is possible to have a truly lossless compression and that the size reduction I am seeing could be a result of all of the different processes a file undergoes that you have outlined.
I looked into the effects that backwards compatibility has on the conversion process which might interest you http://dpbestflow.org/DNG#backwards-compatibility
I also posted to luminous landscape's forums http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/index.php?topic=89101.new;topicseen#new
Although it wouldn't surprise me if the DNG conversion process tossed the xmp-like metadata, and kept the original stuff, but it would surprise me if it tossed the original stuff - but as I said before, I haven't scrutinized for completeness so I don't know.
I've done testing in which I converted .mos camera raw files with their sidecar xmps and without their sidecar xmps. My tests revealed that the DNG definitely carries over xmp metadata although it is not clear to me exactly how it is carried and if anything is lost.

Batch Process increases file size from 230kb - 5044kb

I'm currently using Acrobat 7 Professional.
I want to use the "Batch" process to re-convert pdf documents that were watermarked using the batch process. We're talking 1000+ documents.
The reason we need to re-convert them is because the watermarked documents are taking more than 4min/page to print, if it prints at all.
I've manually re-converted a few of the documents using "print to pdf", kept the file size at 230kb and with no printing issues.
However, since we have 1000s of these documents to do, most with multiple pages, this would be a very time consuming project.
I've "Batched" "print to pdf" and it also takes care of our printing issues, however, the file size has jumped to 5044kb. Having literally thousands of files to do - this is an issue on our file server.
I've done multiple tests with adjusting the pdf settings in the batch process... some work (and again the file size is large) - some don't allow for printing or slow it way down again.
I understand that it's a "layer" or "transparency" thing that's slowing the printing process and when I mess with it in the batch process, it takes care of the printing issues but not the file size.
Can someone help me please??? I've been working on this for a couple days now and I'm at my limits.
How can I batch process that will flatten layers but give me a manageable file size?
Your help would be GREATLY appreciated - Michelle

I don't know if it can help here, but don't I recall that wayyyy back in Photoshop 7.0 the last File - Save As you have executed sets the JPEG quality for batch File - Save As commands? I am not sure when the "Override Action Save-As Commands" became functional, but try this:
1. Uncheck "Override Action Save-As Commands".
2. Remove the "File - Save As" step you have recorded in your action. The action should NOT save the file.
3. Save any old JPEG file at the quality level you prefer, just to set the "memory" of the quality level.
4. Run the File - Automate - Batch, specifying input and output folders there.
I'll bet it will work.
-Noel

Log Configurator - Increase log file size from 10 mb to 20 mb

Hi All,
We have implemented custom logging in our implementation using custom Log Destinations and Locations.
The log destination (inside log configurator service) we were using earlier had size of 10 mb for each file and the file count was 5.
Now, as the log files are getting archived very soon we changed the log file size to 20 mb and file count as 5.
After restarting server, the log viewer in NWA and within Visual Admin does not show updated logs. We have monitored this for sometime now so that new logs are written to the log files still the situation is same.
Strangely, logs are getting updated at OS level in the log files but the entries are nto shown on Log Viewer in NWA or Visual Admin.
Are there any restrictions on the log file size or any other parameter needs to be changed to make this work ?
Looking forward for your inputs and suggestions.
Regards,
Prasanna

Hi All,
We have implemented custom logging in our implementation using custom Log Destinations and Locations.
The log destination (inside log configurator service) we were using earlier had size of 10 mb for each file and the file count was 5.
Now, as the log files are getting archived very soon we changed the log file size to 20 mb and file count as 5.
After restarting server, the log viewer in NWA and within Visual Admin does not show updated logs. We have monitored this for sometime now so that new logs are written to the log files still the situation is same.
Strangely, logs are getting updated at OS level in the log files but the entries are nto shown on Log Viewer in NWA or Visual Admin.
Are there any restrictions on the log file size or any other parameter needs to be changed to make this work ?
Looking forward for your inputs and suggestions.
Regards,
Prasanna

I need to insert my photo into an external website but it needs to be reduced in file size from 4.4 to 2mb can anyone help..

Hi, I need to insert my photo onto a profile page of an external website. Trouble is that the jpeg file is 4.4 and it needs to be reduced to 2 mb. I have tried everything that I can think of but nothing has worked. I'm not very computer confident, so if anyone can support me on this, I'd welcome the help.

Open the photo in the Preview application and click Save As... in the File menu. Its size will be indicated near the bottom of the resulting dialog box. Move the quality slider until the size you need appears, name the new file and select the location where you want to save it, and click the Save button.

File Sizes from Tiger to Leopard?

I am migrating from Tiger on a G4 to Leo on a Mac Pro. When I copy files, the size of the tiger folder is larger than the leo folder. They both have the same # of files. Does anyone know why this may be?
Maybe different HD formats?

Files that are the same size will take up more space on a larger drive that uses the same format due to inefficiencies in the filesystem; specifically, the disk is divided into very small blocks, and if only part of a block is used up, all of it is counted as used. The blocks are larger on larger disks because the filesystem limits the absolute number of them.
(28996)

Change in RAW File Size From CS5 to CC?

I've been shooting with a Nikon D700 in RAW format. When I was using CS5, my RAW files were opening up in Photoshop at approx. 11" x 17" at 300 dpi. (4256 x 2832 pixels). Since I've upgraded to PS Creative Cloud, however, the same RAW files from the same camera are opening up at approx. 9" x 14" at 300 dpi., with the SAME number of pixels...and I can't seem to find any way of changing that. Can anyone advise what's going on here?

911pix wrote:
I seemed to have more choices; now, unless I check the "Resize" box I'm just left with the "Default 12.1 MP" option. If I leave this unchanged, and open the image from the RAW ACR dialog screen by clicking on "Open Image" at bottom right, it simply opens at 9.44" x 14.187" at 300 dpi. Any other ideas?
You seem to be confused about how many megapixels your camera has. You have 12.1 megapixels. 4256 x 2832, which is most certainly NOT 11 x 17 at 300 ppi (do the math).
Or maybe you didn't realize what Camera Raw was doing before with the setting you chose.
Check the Resize to Fit box. Go ahead, it won't bite. It will give you the opportunity to open your D700 images at an upsampled resolution, as before (which, by the way, is a good idea; you can get better quality images that way - I do it all the time).
-Noel

How to compress pdf file size from 16mb to 4mb

Can you please tell me how to compress a PDF email size of 16mb to 4mb?

http://pdf-compressor.en.softonic.com/
However PDF compression in general depending on format (pdf-A, pdf-X, etc etc) may not work or work well.

Does anyone know why I get varying file sizes when I save a jpg (with same settings-None, 12, base "standard", preview checked) from PhotoshopCS5?

I opened a .psd file (300 ppi, CMYK, .jpgs (1626px x 2130px), I saved it as a jpg (None, 12, base "standard", preview checked).
I then closed the original .psd file.
I repeated those steps on the same file and saved a series of 6 .jpgs.
Of those 6 files, I received 2 large files (6.2MB) and 4 smaller (3.2MB) files.
My coworkers who were having trouble opening some of my jpg images in Windows Photo Gallery on Vista OS were able to open the smaller files but not the larger ones.
Do you have any idea why the same settings would give me different file sizes from CS5?
Is there a way I can make it consistently keep the smaller more compatible version?

How well a image data compresses depends on image content. Image with High detail do not compress well image will little detail will compress well and the file size will be small. Compare a image of a blank white wall to a wall with a black and white checker board wall paper. One is all white it white no other detail to detail the other has squares that vary in size because of perspective angle and distance a lot of detail must be recorded.
I do not know why they can not open some of your images. File size should not be an issue. All your image decoded are the same size Width number of Pixels Height numbers of pixels background layer only for these are jpeg files.

Why would two copies of Lightroom 5 create DNG files with different sizes from the same RAW file? (size is dramatically different, on the order of doubled in size.)

I have a copy of LIghtroom 5 on my office computer and a personal copy on my home computer. I convert my RAW files to DNG with Lightroom when I import them. Files I shoot for work also get imported on my home workstation. I noticed today that the resulting DNG files for the same RAW image are widely different in size. The ones at home are roughly twice as big as the ones from the office.
To the best of my knowledge, things are set up the same on both workstations. Any idea what setting might be causing this variation?

I don't think it's possible to apply lossy compression when importing directly into Lightroom. I know you can do it with the DNG converter and on export but I don't think this is the case here.
In which case we need to determine which set-up producing is the "correctly" sized files. What's the camera and what are the respective file sizes from work and home?

Preview.app increases PDF file size.

When making changes to a PDF (in my case, creating annotations), Preview.app will increase the file size of a PDF if that PDF was run through Acrobat Pro's "Reduce File Size" process. For example, I have a PDF that I created using a Book2Net book scanner. I then used Acrobat Pro 10 to OCR the file, then ran Reduce File size which shrank the file size from almost 1.6gb down to about 62mb. If I use Preview.app to make an annotation and then save the file, Preview.app will inflate the file back up to 1.6gb.
An earlier thread (https://discussions.apple.com/thread/1478588?start=0&tstart=0) also discusses a similar issue. I'm not sure if those folks were also working with PDFs that were reduced in size by Acrobat Pro or not.
Anyone else have this issue?
10.6.8 on a MacBook Pro.

That is not normal. same action with acrobat and skim do not do this. Changing file size from 170mb to 780mb (my case) should not be expected.
Preview re-formats the file (which takes a while the first "save"). It may even make scrolling and searching for text faster, but is not desirable all the time.
There is NO explanation from Apple in help or online. Keeping things simple is one thing, having unexpected and unexplained behavior is another.
Last preview update made it pretty much useless for annotations anyways.
Choosing "text" annotation used to allow for clicking anywhere on the pdf and start typing. Now, it automatically creates a text box at the center of page that has to be the dragged (and make sure not dragging other annotations with it). click T multiple times, multiple text boxes on top of each other.
I never thought I would look at Windows users with jealousy. What a bad job they are doing.

File size from save to spreadsheet

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for