Menu file size reduction

I have about 7 menus in my DVD project, each one is about 700MB. But I know for a fact that one of them only has some text in it and shouldn't take up that much space.
Is there a way to reduce the file size of those menus?
Thank you.

Sounds like you may have made them looping menus somehow/added audio to them?
Take a look at 14 & 15 here to see how to check for loops and audio files that you may have
http://dvdstepbystep.com/motion.php

Similar Messages

Amazingly inefficient file size reduction

I have some Texinfo documents that are regularly updated and from which HTML and PDF documentation is then produced. The PDF as it comes from Texinfo is about 850 pages, contains a lot of small graphics, and is about ~50Mb in size. When I use Acrobat (v9.5.1 running on Windows 7 x64) to reduce the file size, the process takes in excess of 12 hours to complete, and when I look at processes in Task Manager when the file size reduction has completed, I can see that the acrobat.exe process has read 61Gb and written 11Gb. At the end of the process, the PDf has been reduced from 50Mb to around 30Mb.
The machine on which Acrobat is running is not at all underpowered - it has an Intel core i7 CPU and 12Gb of RAM. Any suggestions on possibilities for speeding up the file size reduction. The excessively long processing time is not a one-off aberration - I've run the file size reduction half a dozen times now over a few months, and it takes this long to reduce the file size on every occasion.

Hi jamesfb,
You can do so by resizing your image. It will be under the More (&) menu> image size

RE: File Size Reduction by Hiding Layers

I've come across the trick of hiding layers to reduce file size, however am wondering exactly what is happening.
Here's my situation.
20.6mb PSD
Hiding the layers reduces the file to 13.1mb
I've been told that the file reduction is because preview images are no longer being generated.
Could preview images really be accounting for nearly 40% of the file size?
To test this I saved this file as a JPG at 100% quality (not for web) and yielded a 1.34mb file.
This leaves me with roughly 6.6mb of file reduction unaccounted for.
Is something else being siltently compressed/compatibility settings not included/other info being excluded from the file when layers are hidden?
NOTE:
I need to make sure my files have maximum compatibility for opening them in Lightroom and other programs that open PSDs like Painter - so compatibility settings are important.
I need to make sure that everything will still be setup properly for print and no compression is ocurring.
Could some please tell me what exactly is excluded from a file to lower the file size 40% when hiding layers?
Thanks!

Similar, yes... but that still doesn't answer my question
2400x1600px image
only a background layer
RGB 8bits/channel 72dpi
19.2mb
...hide layer = 9.91mb
.. white layer on top = 10.1mb (similar results as you said)
DIFFERENCE: 9.29mb
So, back to the question. Is it REALLY just the thumbnail/preview image taking up 50% of the file size in this case? Seriously? I would think that Adobe would be a bit more efficient with saving preview images. So...back to my earlier test to try and get a comparison of what a full size/full quality preview image would weigh, I've saved this image as:
high res JPG (not for web) = 1.55mb
compressed (layered) PNG = 3.64mb
compressed (layered) TIFF = 3.99mb
I also tried saving different combinations of layered/compressed versions of the PNG and TIFF files (although I think JPGs would be a more accurate representation of preview image file size). Uncompressed PNGs and TIFFs were far too large for the 9.29mb difference.
These don't even come within a couple of mb of the file size reduction from hiding the layers....
So, my question:
If hiding a layer is reducing the file size by supposedely rendering less pixel data to the preview images, then
- why don't any of these "mock" preview image situations come close to accounting for the size in reduction?
Even a layered lossless compressed TIFF still leaves an unexplained 5mb+ (9.29mb total file size reduction - 3.99mb TIFF)
I'm curious and need this for a specific (yet reocurring) situation at the workplace.
It really seems like there's something else that is happening when you save a file with layers hidden.
Is there any other possible scenarios (generating mutliple thumbnail sizes/sets, metadata based on pixel data, other information based on pixel data, silent compression, settings changing, etc) that could possibly explain this?

16x9, 300ppi, 75mb tiff file, LR converts to 1mb jpg. Export in LR 5 is being done at 100%, no file size reduction.

I've got a 16x9, 300ppi, 75mb tiff file that LR converts to 1mb jpg. Export in LR 5 is being done at 100%, no file size reduction. Can't figure out why it is downsizing so small? Even upsized to 420ppi in PS and the export was still only 2mb. Stock agency wants 3mb .jpg minimum. Any help appreciated. Thanks.

Using PS CS6 with NO changes applied to the original TIFF the JPEG file size is 8.686 MB. The slightly larger file size is due to metadata differences between LR and PS.
Both Adobe applications (PS CS6 and LR 5.71) are producing near identical and much larger highest quality JPEG files. PS 12 Quality is the same as LR 100.
SUGGESTION:
1) Close LR and rename your LR Preferences file by adding the extension .OLD to it:
Mac OS X
Preferences
/Users/[user name]/Library/Preferences/com.adobe.Lightroom5.plist.OLD
Windows 7 & 8
Preferences
C:\Users\[user name]\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom\Preferences\Lightroom 5 Preferences.agprefs.OLD
Reopen LR and it will create a new Preferences file. Try the JPEG Export again using the same settings as I have posted.
2) If still no change I suggest uninstalling LR, delete the new LR Preferences file created in step #1 above, keep the .OLD Preferences file, and reinstall LR 5.71.
3) If all is well now close LR and try restoring you original Preferences file by renaming the new Preferences file something like .OLD.OLD and removing .OLD from the original file.

CC BRIDGE FILE SIZE REDUCTION/NO ADJUSTMENT

In previous versions of ADOBE BRIDGE (CS4-CS5) the RAW file size was adjustable using the dialog box accessed from the bottom of the RAW frame. Set to MAXIMUM it produced an image 20x14 @ 21mb for JPEG files. Usable.
The NEW version of BRIDGE creates a file size 14x9@ 9mb for JPEG files.
Using a NIKON D300, shooting RAW, I cannot get a larger file size from BRIDGE no matter what I do. Same raw file loaded into BRIDGE (CS4) GIVES me the larger size, in CC...smaller file.
I've gone through BRIDGE/settings/prefs/adjustments....and there is no control for adjusting file size OR output size.
Very frustrating.
Anyone know about this and if there is a workaround??

I've gone through BRIDGE/settings/prefs/adjustments....and there is no control for adjusting file size OR output size.
Bridge CC uses a different way of resizing then before. You now have almost unlimited choices to set the wanted size using the new image sizing option in the same menu as before in ACR (blue line at the bottom)
Click on the checkmark in front of 'resize to fit' and select the option you want from the drop down menu, e.g. set to match the wanted Megapixels size. By default it stays at the last set option like it was before with the few offered presets.
Try it out, it would be nice to have the option to save your own presets but sadly enough this is not the case. However there are a lot more options to choose from

PDF File Size Reduction

Currently, I am using Adobe Reader XI, but am looking for a version that allows for the reduction of the PDF file size. This is especially useful when e-mailing documents. Can anyone suggest the best version to keep the editing functions (ex. PDF to Word), but add the reduction capabilities?
Thanks.

Bill-
Thanks so much.
I’ll take a look at upgrading to Acrobat and see if that will do the trick.
I appreciate the response.
Thanks again.
Ed Perne
Corporate Director, Human Resources & Risk Management
11500 W. Olympic Boulevard, Suite 345
Los Angeles, CA 90064
(p) 310-235-2745, ext. 408
(f) 310-943-1600

File size reduction from hard drive to iPod via iTunes?

Is it possible to reduce file size when adding music to iPod via iTunes? For instance, if I have downloaded songs at 320kbps and have a file that takes up, say, 10MB on my hard drive can I reduce this in size when transferring to iTunes/iPod so as to increase available storage space on iPod?
Thanks.

Nope. iTunes only offers this option for the iPod shuffle.

File Size Reduction When Editing in Photoshop

When using Smart Objects my DNG file sizes increase from 9mb to over 100mb after a few adjustments.
I found that I can reduce the file size greatly, for example back to 9mb, by reducing the Image Size to, for example 300 x 400 pixels, without flattening.
Then I can save the file. The next time I want to work on it, I can open it, change the image size back to the original, for example, 2592 x 3872, and have all of my adjustments and filters available to make further changes.
Although, I cannot see any difference in quality, I am new to this, and I am concerned that I am not skilled enough to see the difference.
It would be very beneficial to store 9mb files instead of 100mb files and still have the same quality available, when needed.
Please tell me if I am missing something here.

Jeff,
With your guidance, I did an experiment. I made a Curves Layer and painted on the mask to reveal the adjustment. I then changed the file sizes as shown in the table, saved the file, re-opened it, and then re-sized it. (Image Size in pixels; File Size in megabytes). The comments under image refer to the painted area of the layer mask. As you indicated, I did not observe any degradation outside the painted area of the layer mask.
Image Size File Size Layer Mask Image
2592x3872 112.5 mb
800x1195 18.9 Intact Slight Saturation and sharpness
degradation
2x3 8.5 Blurred Major degradation
Thanks for directing me to the issue. This will allow me to make an informed choice when balancing quality with file size.

Tiff file size reduction

I notice that when I open a tiff file with CS6 and then close it, the size has been reduced. If I do the same thing with Microsoft Image software, the file stays the same size. Any idea why? As far as I know I am not telling Cs6 to compress the file.

Using PS CS6 with NO changes applied to the original TIFF the JPEG file size is 8.686 MB. The slightly larger file size is due to metadata differences between LR and PS.
Both Adobe applications (PS CS6 and LR 5.71) are producing near identical and much larger highest quality JPEG files. PS 12 Quality is the same as LR 100.
SUGGESTION:
1) Close LR and rename your LR Preferences file by adding the extension .OLD to it:
Mac OS X
Preferences
/Users/[user name]/Library/Preferences/com.adobe.Lightroom5.plist.OLD
Windows 7 & 8
Preferences
C:\Users\[user name]\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom\Preferences\Lightroom 5 Preferences.agprefs.OLD
Reopen LR and it will create a new Preferences file. Try the JPEG Export again using the same settings as I have posted.
2) If still no change I suggest uninstalling LR, delete the new LR Preferences file created in step #1 above, keep the .OLD Preferences file, and reinstall LR 5.71.
3) If all is well now close LR and try restoring you original Preferences file by renaming the new Preferences file something like .OLD.OLD and removing .OLD from the original file.

Exponential File Size Reduction

Hi All,
Attached is a .vi that I recieved from this forum (Altenbach I believe).
Currently this vi copies every x line from a source file to a new file. It works great however now I am interested in reducing the sampling rate. For example I would like to grab every line initially, then grab every other line, then every third line etc. I was thinking that the easiest way to do this is to introduce a feature that counts up (i.e. grab on line then skip a line, then skip 2, then skip 3, then skip 4...etc to the end of the file).
Any thoughts or help would be greatly appreciated. (Note: I am a very new user to labview and it may be a simple change that I am missing)
Solved!
Go to Solution.
Attachments:
Reduce File Size.vi ‏12 KB

Christian_M wrote:
Attachement is compiled for 8.5.1
I don't think the calculation for N is still correct. We probably need a while loop to see when we run out of elements (or do some more fancy math).
Ideally, the decimation rate should depend on how fast the important values change with each line: Skip many lines if the value is nearly constant, but retain most lines if the signal changes significantly between lines, for example.
Message Edited by altenbach on 10-16-2008 10:04 AM
LabVIEW Champion . Do more with less code and in less time .

Essbase cube/pag file size reduction-bitmap compression

We are seeing some huge pag files in our essbase cube, and Oracle had suggested changing to bitmap compression to see if that will help.(currently, we have 'no compression')
That said, what is the difference between using RLE versus bitmap encoding for BSO cubes?
Would like to hear other's experiences.

(currently, we have 'no compression')^^^You are going to be very happy. Very, very happy.
You can read the Database Administrator's Guide -- just search for "comrpession".
Here it is: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E17236_01/epm.1112/esb_dbag/dstalloc.html
There are a bunch of caveats and rules re the "better" compression method -- having said that, I almost always use RLE as the method it seems the most efficient wrt disk space. This makes sense as this method examines each block and applies the most efficient method: RLE, bitmap, or Index Value pair. I can't see a calculation difference between bitmap and RLE.
How on earth did you get into the position of no compression in the first place?
Regards,
Cameron Lackpour
Edited by: CL on Jul 18, 2011 10:48 AM
Whoops, a couple of things:
1) After you apply the change in compression in EAS or via MaxL, you must stop and then restart the database for the setting to take affect.
2) You must export the database, clear it out, and reload it using the new compression method -- the change in #1 only affects new blocks so you could have a mix of compressed and uncompressed bliocks in your db which won't do anything for storage space.
3) The only way to really and truly know which method is more efficient is to benchmark the calculation (think writing to disk which could be a bit slower than it is now) and compression methods is to do it. Try it as bitmap and write down sample calc times and IND and PAG file size, then try it as RLE and do the same.

File Size Reduction With AA 3.0

Greetings,
I have an audio file, the quality of which needs to stay intact, that needs to be reduced so I can put it on a WordPress website.(Much like one does to send a picture over email)
Is this possible with AA 3.0, if yes how do I do it and if no do you have any suggestions?
Thanks,
Mona

To go on a bit from what Ryclark said:
In fact, there ARE some "lossless" compression algorithms (such as FLAC) the will make your file smaller without compromising quality. The trouble is, they don't make your files all that much smaller--and the codecs for people accessing your Wordpress blog are far from universal. If you need a format that everyone can open without messing around, you're pretty much stuck with MP3 as a compromise.
If you only need a few people to listen to your file in optimum quality--and if they are willing to download necessary codecs--you can get the software you need from http://www.vuplayer.com/audition.php . There are other FLAC codecs available for simple playback if you don't need it to plug into Audition.
However, for universal playback, you're likely stuck with MP3 (which IS a lossy compression system). You'll have to experiment and use your ears to determine the best compromise between file size and quality.
Bob

Batch file size reduction is increasing file size

CS3 on G5 dual. I am prepping images from my clients catalog for the web. Large image and thumbs. I batch converted the large images for web and have a bunch of images at roughly 24k-56K. I duped the folder, renamed to add a T to end of file name to signify thumbnails. I have an action to reduce file size 50% which is about what I want. I ran a few test files and all 6 of them blew up to 96K-124K even though the file is half the size (5x8 to 2.5x4) while remaining 72 dpi.
Client *thinks* the hosting software will generate thumbs for images from the larger images but isn't sure and is requesting I supply thumbs just in case.

The client has a shopping cart and I would have assumed giving her one size (5x8) which strikes me as overly large but she specified that size (or the nearest proportional equivalent) would be sufficient and the database for the web store would generate thumbs on the fly but the support at the hosting company is abysmal and she doesn't want to pay me to spend a few hours figuring this out.
I don't know what SFW is. Here's a screen shot of my settings for 50%:
My action
I posted this over in the Lounge as I didn't get a reply here. Here's a link that shows my action in a QT movie. Weirdly enough, I accidentally deleted my save for web action and can no longer batch export a folder to web jpegs:
QT movie of my other problem
Thx for replying.

Illustrator file size reduction

Illustrator 11.0
Win XP Pro SP2
Adobe Acrobat 6.0
Why are ai files so much larger than the pdf's they generate. For example I cut and pasted an excel spreadsheet into Illustrator. No bitmaps or rasterized data.
ai file is 2.5Mb (acrobat compatible, compression on)
ai file is 7 Mb (compression off) yikes!
saved as pdf 2.2Mb
printed to adobe acrobat 6.0 24kb (maintains vector output with great zoom)
these are all vector files and there is a 100 to 1 size ratio between them.
If I take the small pdf and use the edit file command in acrobat and then re save the illustrator to ai file it is still over 2Mb.
I have a long framemaker document that will have 60 some line drawings and text and I need the ai files to be smaller due to memory considerations.
What can I do to shrink these ai files.? I don't want any bitmaps or rasterized illustrations in my end product pdf file.

Interesting results here. All tests conducted with AI 12 (don't have AI 11). All .ai files were saved with compression and no profile embedded. All PDFs were created via 'save as' or Distiller (print to PDF) using Acrobat 7 compatibility and Text and Line Art preset.
Downloaded [Test1 copy from xcell.ai], opened it in AI 12, stripped unused swatches, styles, brushes, etc. then saved as .ai with no PDF compatibility. Resulting file: 456 KB
Same as above but saved
with PDF compatibility. Resulting .ai file: 417 KB (!)
Same as above but saved as v11 .ai with, then without, PDF compatibility. Resulting .ai files: 1,011 KB
regardless of PDF compatibility (!)
As above but saved as v10 .ai without PDF compatibility. Resulting file: 412 KB
Again v10 but with PDF compatibility: 374 KB (!)
Saved as PDF with .ai editing preserved: 999 KB
Saved as PDF without .ai editing preserved: 133 KB
Distilled PDF (printed to Adobe PDF): 56 KB
Downloaded Excel file and printed to PDF from Excel. PDF file: 53 KB
That PDF file then opened in AI 12 and saved as v12 .ai with no PDF compatibility: 282 KB

Picture File Size Reduction for email

Is this possible within Adobe Photoshop Album Starter Edition 3.0?

Yes. When you send an email from PSA SE, you have a choice of sizes. It will make a temporary copy for the email.

Menu file size reduction

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for