Help to resize at a file size threshold

I feel as though there must be a simple solution to this issue but I just can't break through. I am attempting to resize an image so that it will be uploadable in a media building program. This program does not allow me to import images greater than 200K and so I went to the image resize function in Photoshop CC. There I found under Image>Image Size, as always, the window which includes the size and dimension attributes of the image (which, incidentally, is a single layer psd as "Background"). As I change the dimensions of the image, I can get the Image Size in the window to reduce to under 200K by changing the resolution, width, and height as needed. When I save the image as a jpg, it does not allow the image to be saved as anything smaller than 1.1M. In the jpeg options window, the file size when saved at a quality of 12 is 1.2M but is 1.1M at a quality setting of 0. I must be missing something. Can anyone shed some light on this for me, please? Thanks!

That worked. For the sake of the discussion, do you suppose that there was something about this image (like metadata) that would simply not allow it to be compressed any further than the minimum size I described? It would make sense given that the image quality was progressively worse as I experimented with reopening the newly saved and slightly smaller file each time. Even then, I could only get a small reduction in total data quantity but the images became poorer and poorer, as you would expect, as the jpeg options window told me I was getting smaller and smaller. The image started to look like it was capped from somebody's Minecraft screen but the size was still up around a meg.

Similar Messages

Resizing photos to file size.

Hi all, I'm trying to resize a pic to 10 k file size for use as an online avatar. Ideally I'd like to keep it around 100 by 135 pixels. In Windows this is very easy but in the amazingly overhyped and under-featured iphoto it appears to be well nigh impossible. Any ideas on how to do this for someone who desperately wants to stay in osx but increasingly finds App apps unfathomably obtuse? Thanks for your time.

Yep, been there done that but no joy. There's no mention of re-sizing a photo by file size in the help file and no ability to do so in Export. And to tell the truth, having to export to re-size is really clunky not to mention, somewhat erratic. I managed to get the file down to 8 kb by reducing it to 45 x 45 pixels but that's too small. My next size was around 105 x 140 and came in at 20 kb. I attempted to reduce the file size by reducing the photo size in stages down to 60 x 80 but the file size would increase rather than decrease. Any useful input?

Batch Resizing Based On File Size

I have a lot of very large (400-600Mb) tiff files (from a scanner) that all have different ratios (some square, some 4:3, some extreme panoramic). Is there a way I can batch resize them all to a certain file size? (eg 200Mb)
I've been looking everywhere but can't find anyone on any forums trying to do the same thing. Strange because i thought it might be quite a common problem.
Thanks for any help/advice,
Lewis

Resizing is very much dependent on Image compression algorithms (or what ever they are called)… My Guess is that this is beyond the 'average' scripter if you wanted to deal with the open file data size then this can be done. If you want to deal with saved file's system sizes you may well be out of luck…

Save For Web vs. Resizing vs. File Size vs. PNG

In playing around with some settings while saving a .png file, I noticed some weird results. For this example, the original image is 300 x 300, but I want the final size to be 200 x 200. I get different results depending on the order I perform the following operations (I never thought the order mattered until now).
1. start with 300 x 300 image, choose save for web, select png-24, with transparency, white matte, convert to sRGB, change image size to 200 x 200, then save - the file size is 37kb
2. start with 300 x 300 image, use Photoshop's "image size" to change to 200 x 200, then save for web, etc - the file size is 111kb
So depending on which step I resize the image, the file size is significantly different - if I resize BEFORE using save for web, the file size is much larger. This is just weird to me, but I always resize AFTER choosing save for web, so that's why I've never caught this until now. In case you ask, while using Photoshop's "image size", all three options are checked at the bottom of that window, so nothing is getting re-sampled or anything like that.
The only thing I can think of is each of those methods treat pixel data differently when reducing the dimensions. When I overlay both exported .png files on top of each other, I see no difference in pixel quality and/or color shift - so why the big difference in file size? Unsurprisingly, if I just save the file straight to .png, the sharpness is much better, and the file size is 46kb. I did notice when saving for web, the colors become a little more saturated.
Are all these results typical? I've never really paid much attention to the results when exporting .png's. I always thought the results were lossless (in general).

Too many variables
What? There are 2 variables here (variables = scenarios = steps). Only two different operations.
1. resize the image, THEN use "save for web" = 91kb
2."save for web", THEN change image size = 157kb
Hopefully my logic translates here:
All other settings are the same. I even made sure the .psd was sRGB this time. The specific question was "why does the different workflow order produce such a big difference in file size"?
In creating a new test file (http://www.shan-dysigns.com/userForums/photoshop/savePNG.zip), I did notice an interesting thing: (I'm including my files in case you want to follow along or test for yourself)
If I merge all layers BEFORE performing the steps above, the file sizes were relatively closer to one another - 168kb and 157kb (respectively from the 1, 2 list above)
One thing to note is all the .psd layers are either shapes or text - this whole scenario may be totally different if each layer had rasterized content (actually, it does, by about -20kb).
The file size in step 1 above didn't jump until it had to consider rastered text/shapes into the calculation. So all this tells me the difference in file size has to do with how each process handles vector data. Maybe when you allow PS to resize the image first, the overall file size is smaller because the vector data gets recalculated???
I don't know how to properly interpret all these differences, but I do know there is something about PS's operation of resizing the canvas with vector data versus resizing the canvas with rasterized data - this has to be where the difference in file size lies.
Maybe I've just wasted a bunch of time on the obvious, but I think I learned something here. Now my head hurts and my eyes have popped out of my head.
So, Chris, I guess there ARE more variables in this situation. My curse is being nosey and wanting to know more technically about PS than most casual designers probably would care about.

Help Itunes is mutiplying my file size by ten

Re: 64 bit version on iTunes?
Posted: Jan 21, 2008 11:29 AM in response to: saturn51 Reply Email
** Hello folks new here, but not that new to itunes but when I loaded music into Itunes it doubles the amount of mb for the file by ten and uses up all my hard drive. For example one song that I have stored on my external drive says song is 3.59mb, but when I look at it in itunes or on the hard drive that itunes copied it to says it is 35.9mb.
Ok so for the next question, I thought that itunes didnt copy the file unless you checked the box to do so, mine is unchecked and it countinually does so. So now I have wasted 60g (not counting when it mutiplies its well over 100g) of space as opposed to 30g which is what I have in music.
I have many times tried to uni and reinstall itunes but I can not get it to work right. I am downloading 7.6 My computer is running 32 bit vista even know they advertised 64 on the stickers.
I need help, want to load some new audio books but cant in fear of losing everthing on my Ipod now, and that would suck before I head out on my trip.
Thanks for the help
Clint

Well, I seem to have solved my own problem. Do I get 10 points, I wonder? It appears that my poor iMac was in desperate need of a masssive cleaning. Thanks to other posts here and elsewhere, I found out about Cocktail, a free download -- unless you chip in for the more advanced version. This is a powerful and easy to understand tool. I used it to perk my iMac up to a level I have not seen in a LONG time. The spinning beach ball of death must go play elsewhere. Among other things, I cleared out all my caches, eliminated a ton of foreign languages and did several repairs, including tracking down and killing a corrupted permission. It also taught me how to tap into my computer's activity logs and gave me other useful insights. GOOD stuff. I did other things not related to Cocktail to free up processing power -- such as turning off file- size view option in Finder -- but Cocktail is what solved this problem. As I type this, I am happily listening to songs that earlier would not play. What a relief. I am now especially looking forward to that new RAM. We'll be blazing fast then, by gum.

Need Help controlling Garageband Jam Pack File Sizes

I recently purchased all of the Jam Packs, and would love to make use of them with both Garageband and Logic Pro. The problem is the HUGE amount of space HD space they demand. I've researched these forums, and read about the plan of installing the Jam Packs, moving the Apple Loops to an External HD, and then cleaning out the Apple Loops Library & Index files on my main HD. The problem is, once I did this (testing it with just the World Jam Pack), I STILL lost over 10 GB's of HD space, compared to what I had before the initial Jam Pack instillation! What's taken up all of this space, and how do I get my space back? CAN I put the Jam Packs on an external drive, or not? Thanks in advance!

I don't think there's 10 gig worth, but the Jam Packs install instruments as well. Leave those where they are.
X
(I miss San Diego)

Resize Video, both the file size and actual size

Hi All,
I am very new to Adobe Premiere (CS3). I have had it for a while but not needed to use until now. A client of mine has sent me a video that he wants on his website. But it’s 150M and 1280 * 720. Can anyone help me out with how I can resize both the file size and actual size to say 800 * 450 so it can stream it via the net?
Like I said very new to this,
Cheers,
Mike.

The first thing you need to do is determine just what KIND of file you were sent, so you may start a project that matches the file
Read Bill Hunt on a file type as WRAPPER http://forums.adobe.com/thread/440037?tstart=0
What is a CODEC... a Primer http://forums.adobe.com/thread/546811?tstart=0
What CODEC is INSIDE that file? http://forums.adobe.com/thread/440037?tstart=0
I don't do streaming video, so you should search the help file... I **think** what you want out is a Flash file, but that is only after you know what you are going to load into the CS3 timeline

FileAdapter Maximum file size

Hi
As per the SAP help document to restrict the file size in Advanced Mode of File sender adapter i used to following variable
Name :MaximumFileSize Value: 10000
So that only files of size less than 10000 bytes should be picked up. Otherwise error should trigger. But this is not happening.
Can anyone help me
-keerthi

Hi Keerthika,
>>So that only files of size less than 10000 bytes should be picked up. Otherwise error should trigger. But this is not happening.
What is not happening?? is the files with size less than 10000 bytes not getting picked or files with size > 10000 bytes is not making error in channel??
Regards
Suraj

File size reported reported differently

Can someone help me explain why this file size is reported differently depending whether you list file or folder properties:
This is an Azure Basic_A1 VM. Drive E: is standard VHD attached to the VM (Page Block Storage).
This is an active/open file that is currently being written to, and is growing in size.
How is it that file size is reported as 8 GB if you query the folder, and 24 GB if you query the file?
Sam Boutros, Senior Consultant, Software Logic, KOP, PA http://superwidgets.wordpress.com (Please take a moment to Vote as Helpful and/or Mark as Answer, where applicable) _________________________________________________________________________________
Powershell: Learn it before it's an emergency http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/scriptcenter/powershell.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/scriptcenter/dd793612.aspx

I ran this script for the last 8 or so hours out of this 19 hour upload:
$Folder = "e:\Backups\Sam Client\To Azure Page Block Repository"
$Log = "c:\Sandbox\Upload4.csv"
Write-Output '"FileQuery","FolderQuery","Time"' | Out-File $Log
Do {
$a = (dir "$Folder\To Azure Page Block Repository2014-09-23T051450.vbk").length/1GB
$b = (dir $Folder)[1].length/1GB
cls
Write-Host "File size reported from file list: $('{0:N2}' -f $a) GB" -ForegroundColor Green
Write-Host "File size reported from folder list: $('{0:N2}' -f $b) GB" -ForegroundColor Yellow
dir $Folder | FT -AutoSize
Write-Output """$a"",""$b"",""$(Get-Date -Format 'hh:mm:ss tt')""" | Out-File $Log -Append
Start-Sleep -Seconds 10
} while ($a -ne $b)
That collected over 3,000 sampling points that are 10 seconds apart. I then graphed that data:
The vertical axis is file size in GB, the horizontal axis is time (not directly - it's sampling points)
And you can see file size as reported by folder query lags behind file size as reported by file query. The amount of lag was upwards of 90GB at its highest point. And it took anywhere from roughly 5 minutes to 3 hours for 1 indicator to catch up with the
other.
The question is why these two sets of numbers are different? Is there caching going on somewhere? Is one indicator accounting for all file blocks while the other is accounting for committed blocks only? Can someone from Microsoft shed some light on this?
This is important to know to be able to plan disk space requirements when attempting to use Azure as backup target with large data sets regardless of the software used.
Sam Boutros, Senior Consultant, Software Logic, KOP, PA http://superwidgets.wordpress.com (Please take a moment to Vote as Helpful and/or Mark as Answer, where applicable) _________________________________________________________________________________
Powershell: Learn it before it's an emergency http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/scriptcenter/powershell.aspx http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/scriptcenter/dd793612.aspx

How to optimize file size when opening RAW in Bridge?

I seem to recall opening RAW files through Bridge and into Photoshop a couple of years ago and I was always given a choice of file size options. What has happened to these options? can someone please help me get the biggest file size out of a RAW (DNG)? thanks!

J Maloney wrote:
Sure. If you open a RAW file in camera raw, at the bottom of the camera raw window you adjust the settings. I'm sure this is equal to or better than opening at the native resolution and upsizing in PS.
According to the book*, upsizing in Photoshop is better and the best method is Bicubic Smoother.
*Real World Camera Raw by Bruce Fraser and Jeff Schewe.

Export file size help...output seems way too big

I have a 12 minute movie with audio, video and stills in it.
Currently when I export it the file is 865MB... I need it to be less than 100 with decent quality. It is a tutorial video that will be downloaded from the web.
Can you please give me some direction on how to do this? On what variables to change etc. I know if I exported this out of Camtasia Studio, it would be around that 100 or less bench mark .... problem is I don't know what the settings for the Camtasia preset are.
I am using the following setup:
Quicktime Format
Summary:
Output:
1400x790, 15(fps), quality 100
48000 Hz, Stero, 16 bit
H.264
Source:
Sequece, 01-OverviewSWKit
1920x1080 (1.0), 24fps, Progressive, 00:12:03:12
48000 Hz, Stereo
Settings:
Video Codec: H264
Basica Settings:
Quality 100
Width/height (1400 x 790
Aspect: Square pixels (1.0)
Render at maximum depth - "UN"-checked
Depth: 24 bit
Advanced Settings
Key Frame every 1 frame - "UN" checked
Optimize stills - "UN" checked
Frame Reordering "UN" checked
Bitrate setting:
Limit data rate to xxxx "UN" checked
Use Maximum Render Quality - "UN" Checked
Use Previews "UN" Checked
Use Frame Blending "CHECKED"

Well, with the Apple H.264 encoder in a QuickTime container, you're a bit limited to the number of things you can tweak to decrease final file size. Using a more advanced H.264 encoder, like the free x264, will give access to many of the more "high-tech" bells and whistles that are part of the H.264 standard. One potential would be to tick the "Key frame every # frame" box and try a few values there, usually at multiples of your frame rate. Key frames are "whole" frames that take up much more space in the final file size, and decrease their frequency might help slightly decrease file size, though it will also affect quality.
Short of changing the dimensions of your destination video, decreasing the frame rate, or changing the bitrate of the video and audio streams, you will eventually reach a limit of how much you can push one parameter or another. You might try using H.264 in the Format (not codec) dropdown; this will give you a bit more control over encoding to an H.264 MP4 file. Unless you specifically need a QuickTime MOV, you might find you get better results with the H.264 MP4.
These are of course just the options in Premiere itself. Once you go outside the castle walls, you can find a whole bunch of other options, though they usually come at a steeper learning curve. The big thing to remember is that there is no free lunch when it comes to encoding; you have to give a bit here to gain there, and it's all about setting thresholds of what you're willing to accept.

CFX_Image seems to resize ok but the file size is too big??

my host uses CFX_IMAGE v1.6.6.11 (
http://80.79.138.227/cfximage/index.cfm
which does a perfectly good job of resizing images except for
the fact that the resultant file size is too large. i found that
compared to resizing images locally, resizing using this tag
resulted in file sizes of double the size.
i have tried tweaking the "quality" paramater but without
success, i could get the file size down but then the quality was
poor.
so i am forced to resize images locally using macromedia
fireworks or MS paint before uploading them.
ideally i need to be able to resize images server side but
without inordinate file sizes.
does anyone else use a cfx_image tag that's more efficient?
or does anyone else know how to get this tag to perform better?
any help would be very gratefully received.
thank you

Hi,
You may want to take a look a this script:
Link
image resize
Don't forget to read the comments there they contain some
useful information.
Kind regards,
Nebu

I need to export a photo at around 1meg file size,and dont seem to be able to do it in the presets can anyone help please ,I shoot on a canon 5d

I need to export a photo at around 1meg file size,and dont seem to be able to do it in the presets can anyone help please ,I shoot on a canon 5d

I believe Frank is referring to the end use (e.g., for print or on-screen use).
Until he returns, I can tell you that I ran a quick test using an image from the Aperture 3 training book library which was as follows:
Camera = Canon EOS 5D Mark II
Master resolution = 5616 x 3744 (21 MP)
I was able to export to a JPEG with end file size of 1 MB as follows:
Export Presets drop-down > select 'Edit' option
Selected preset name 'JPEG - 50% of Original Size' > change percentage value to 40% > change DPI value to '300' > click OK to set as current default > Export version to desktop.
The exported JPEG has a resolution of 2246 x 1498 and appears on screen to have the same image quality of the original in Aperture.
Note - I did not change the default Image Quality slider in the Export Preset dialog (which left it at 10).
Basically, you will need to play around with the settings until you find the appropriate values to arrive at an image version you want.

Adobe Media Encoder - File Size HUGE. HELP

I have a MPG that is 216mb. When I attempt to use Media Encoder 5 or 5.5 the estimated file size for a 640 x 480 f4v is 26456mb.
I have used the computer at my school with the same file and the file size is 2mb. What am I doing wrong at home? I can't image encoder can make a 216mb file become 2.6 gb.
Please help.
Howard

Please drop the source clip into MediaInfo and check what it says the duration is. (If you don't have MediaInfo, you can download it for free from the Internet.) If possible, please post a link to the clip so that we can download it and check it out for ourselves.
Two details catch my eye in the Source Summary. Both screenshots show that the field order is Unknown and that the clip has no audio. I doubt either of those details accounts for the incorrect duration, but the unknown field order, at least, makes me wonder whether AME is having trouble interpretting the footage correctly. I suggest going to the Interpret Footage dialog (right-click on the clip in AME's queue and select Interpret Footage), and setting the Field Order to the correct value [Upper Field First, Lower Field First, or No Fields (Progressive Scan)]. While you're there, check whether the frame rate is accurate--according to the screenshot, it's 30.000 fps. Is that accurate?

Urgent help please, I made an file with the size 1024x768, then i made two folios, one for retina 2048x1536 and one for non retina 1024x768, i have alot of video content in it, everything works perfect on my retina ipad, but when i open it on ipad 2 an er

Urgent help please, I made an file with the size 1024x768, then i made two folios, one for retina 2048x1536 and one for non retina 1024x768, i have alot of video content in it, everything works perfect on my retina ipad, but when i open it on ipad 2 an error appears on the pages with video content?

its in german:
der Vorgang könnte nicht abgeschlossen werden.
something like the process coundnt be completed

Help to resize at a file size threshold

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for