Why are ACR PSD files 10-20 percent larger than the same file resaved in PSD?

Why are ACR > PSD files 10-20 percent larger than the same file resaved in PSD? I posted this many years ago and never found an answer. Now that my drives fill up quicker, I thought I might chase this question a little bit further.
Same .CR2 saved within ACR either with cmd-R or open ACR within PSD, the saved file is 34.5mb. Resave that same file (no edits) within PSD either with or without Max-compatible and the file is now 30.7mb. Another file that is 24.5 becomes 19.5MB.
Why the difference? Is ACR and PSD actually using different compression strategies?
thanks.
Mac 10.8.5 / CC / ACR 8.4.1 - but this has been a consistent behavior over many years and versions, CS6 / CC.
Same .CR2 saved within ACR either with cmd-R or open ACR within PSD, the saved file is 34.5mb. Resave that same file (no edits) within PSD either with or without Max-compatible and the file is now 30.7mb. Another file that is 24.5 becomes 19.5MB.

Hi Jeff
If it is RLE it's not as efficient as LZW:
Saved ACR>PSD = 40.1MB (sample image this AM)
opened in PS and resaved as PSD = 30.8MB
resaved as TIF without LZW = 40.1MB (this adds to your thought that the ACR>PSD doesn't us any compression)
resaved as TIF/LZW = 9.6MB
Jeff Schewe wrote:
I really think your priorities are a bit off. 10-20% is meaningless...you just need to get bigger.... and quit fussing over a few GB's here or there...
??? I hope that the Adobe engineers are fussing over 10-20% efficiencies.
I'm within arms reach to a rack of 40TB of drives (doesn't include off-site drives), and all 2TB drives are being recycled to 4TB drives, as a result the rack is always growing. Actually the ACR>PSD files don't really make a difference in our long term storage, only for the nightly backups. But anyway, how you save, what you save etc. should all be part of the discussion.
.... so in my case, throw in an excess MB here and there and all of a sudden you are talking TB's. Plus advantages in backup times, drive life, and energy use.
Somebody added compression into the PS>PSD format, but it wasn't included in the ACR>PSD format, was it a decision or an oversight? If it's just a matter of making ACR compatible with PS when saving the same PSD format..... then why not?
regards,
j

Similar Messages

Why would an alias file be larger than the original file?

I have a simple document that is 106kb. When I create an alias to the file, the alias is 133kb. Why would the alias file be larger than the orginal file when the alias file is simply a redirect to the original file?

Francine has a good explanation here:
https://discussions.apple.com/message/10337543#10337543
Matt

Corrupting files when 2 premiere stations accessing the same file

I'm working on a Shared Unity RAID system in a post house. When 2 Premiere stations are accessing the same clip, the clip temporarily corrupts, and i get the "Unsupported format or damaged file" error. The file returns to normal one one machine is using it. Certainly not optimal for simultaneous projects. Can this be worked around? Mac based, OSX Version 10.8.4 on Premiere CC

Anything other than Anywhere is not designed to work over a network, and certainly not on the same file at the same time (I don't need/use Anywhere, so I don't know if it will let two people work on the same file at the same time)
Premiere doesn't work properly, if at all, over a network
-see messages #1 and #3 in http://forums.adobe.com/thread/771151
-you MUST give all users administrator accounts to use Premiere
-and especially Encore dual layer http://forums.adobe.com/thread/969395
-#5 Server 2008 is UNsupported http://forums.adobe.com/thread/851602
-a work around, of sorts http://forums.adobe.com/thread/957523
-and not on a "domain" http://forums.adobe.com/thread/858977
-http://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/kb/networks-removable-media-dva.html

Why is my Time Machine backup so much larger than the files being backed up?

Mac Mini Server 10.7.1 on a 2011 Mac Mini Server
Here are the drives on my system:
Here are the items excluded from backup:
Note that Server HD and Archive are the only non-excluded disks and the estimated backup size is 563.2 GB (this corresponds with the actual usage on those drives.
However, when I run time machine, it keeps going until by 2TB backup drive is nearly full! And that's with only a single backup instance and nothing else on the drive:
What's going on here??? If I don't backup the other external drive, the backup size doesn't blow up like this.

Just to clarify, the reason why Time Machine backups are generally small is that TM makes extensive use of hard links. symbolic links are small files that point to a different file system entry, while hard links point directly to the original file data on disk (hard links are unintuitive - they are like having multiple doors into a room, except that you can place the doors anywhere you like and still get to the room). So even though there may be dozens of backups of a disk, most of the backed-up items will only have one data source on disk, with only items that have changed needing new representations.
I suspect that when you try to backup a time machine backup, it is converting the hard links into separate on-disk representations - basically taking every pointer to a given piece of on-disk data and creating a new file from it. I'm not sure if that would be a linear or geometric size increase (it sounds like the latter), but either way it's going to get ugly fairly fast.

Why are some movies only available in languages other than the original version?

I have mentionned this before, and it keeps happening, and it is oh so annoying! Why in the world would you make a movie available in a translated version, but not in the original? This has happened to me several times now, and it is incredibly frustrating. At least when buying movies on Amazon, I always easily know what language it will be in! Films in French? Some are just in French, some are in French and others. Films in Dutch? Quite a few are originals with Dutch, why not do the same in French?

Take it up with whomever or whatever company distributes those films in your country. Those sorts of options are up to the distributors, not Apple. Only the company or people who own or control the distribution rights to the intellectual property can say what is or is not put up in the iTunes Store.

The amount of memory used for data is a lot larger than the saved file size why is this and can I get the memory usage down without splitting up the file?

I end up having to take a lot of high sample rate data for relativily long periods of time. When I save the data it is usually over 100 MB. When I load the data for post-processing though the amount of memory used is excessively higher than the file size. This causes my computer to crash because 1.5 GB is not enough. Is there a way to stop this from happening withoput splitting up the file into smaller files.

LabVIEW can efficiently handle large files, far beyond 100Mb, provided that care is taken in the coding of the loading/processing routines. Here are several suggestions:
1) Check out the resources National Instruments has put together (NI Developer Zone > Development Library > Measurement and Automation Software > LabVIEW > Development System > Optimizing Applications > Managing Memory), specifically the article entitled "Managing Large Data Sets in LabVIEW".
2) Load and process the data in chunks if possible.
3) Avoid sending the data to front panel indicators, using local/global variables for data storage, or changing data types unless absolutely necessary.
4) If using LabVIEW 7.1, use the "show buffer" tool to determine when LabVIEW is creating extra
copies of data in memory.

Why is Keynote storing images 20x larger than the original file size upon import?

In Keynote, I'll add a 150KB PNG image to a slide and the 500KB presentation goes to 3.7MB... a more than 3MB increase. I'm trying to troubleshoot large file sizes as a simple deck takes up 50-100MB on disk. Anyone know what is going on to make the file 20x larger once added to Keynote? And how I can keep the file size down? The 'Reduce File Size' option is worthless in this case... offering a less than 10% reduction on the earlier 20x amplification. Thanks

Chris H 71 wrote:
This was originally in Keynote 09.
Yes converting an existing version 5 file in to Keynote 6 does many strange things. Any existing version 5 files I have, I continue to edit in 5. When starting a new presentation, I can use 6 without many problems at all.
I provided the files to replicate the issue to Apple support and never heard back.
Apple do not provide feedback to users on issues, they only request information from users.

HT201077 Why are my photos on my iphone and ipad not the same?

My camera roll and photo stream on my iphone 4 and ipad 2 are not the same. I have the same apple id for both and both devices are running ios 7.0.4.
Any ideas?

The camera roll contains photos actually taken on your device, or saved from text messages, emails, websites, etc. Because of this you shouldn't expect both devices to have the same photos in the camera roll.
The my photo stream album is also usually differerent on your devices. This happens because photo stream photos only remain in iCloud for 30 days (even though they stay on your devices longer). When you enable photo stream on a device, it can only receive photo stream photos still in iCloud, which are those from the last 30 days. A consequence of this is that unless you enabled photo stream on both devices within 30 days of each other, one is likely to end up with fewer photo stream photos than the other.

Can open .pdf files in Chrome but cannot open the same file after saving it.

Description:
A problem caused this program to stop interacting with Windows.
Problem signature:
Problem Event Name:          AppHangB1
Application Name:          AcroRd32.exe
Application Version:          11.0.3.37
Application Timestamp:          518e18e3
Hang Signature:          99d4
Hang Type:          0
OS Version:          6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.1
Locale ID:          1033
Additional Hang Signature 1:          99d4b1f941b223144a152a1173c0a0ff
Additional Hang Signature 2:          01f5
Additional Hang Signature 3:          01f554accbda5b57fa70e2256b021236
Additional Hang Signature 4:          99d4
Additional Hang Signature 5:          99d4b1f941b223144a152a1173c0a0ff
Additional Hang Signature 6:          01f5
Additional Hang Signature 7:          01f554accbda5b57fa70e2256b021236
Read our privacy statement online:
http://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?linkid=104288&clcid=0x0409
If the online privacy statement is not available, please read our privacy statement offline:
C:\Windows\system32\en-US\erofflps.txt

Thanks Pat. Tried each, restarted computer each time; tried the "Accept" routine several days ago - it worked briefly and then stopped. Uninstalled Reader and Flash as well. Strange thing with Flash, one of my online broker programs provides streaming of CNBC. When I clicked on the CNBC option to initiate CNBC, I got a message saying that I needed to load Flash. I did, and it loaded again with no mention of Flash having already been installed.
Using Internet Explorer works, as well as, clicking on the .pdf file within Windows Explorer (WE). Expanding the window in WE makes it large enough to read. I would still like to find a way to open the files as they are designed to open.
I have done all of the Adobe updates as they have been presented. Microsoft updates load automatically, and restart my computer in the process. I do not look to see what the updates have been. I figure if there was not a need, Microsoft would not make the updates.
[private data removed]

Why are all my BC sites down suddenly - all at the same time

one by one, all my BC sites, plus others I have with other partners have gone offline. whats happening at BC???

http://status.businesscatalyst.com
IF things go belly up for what ever reason, hardware fault etc - Can not really give us any warning
Yep not good things went down (again) but if something happens you can not look into the future and let people know its about to happen, lol.

Lightroom JPEG files far larger than equivalent Photoshop files?

I'm using Lightroom 2.3 on a Mac. If I take an image and export it from Lightroom as a JPEG at the 60 quality setting, the resulting JPEG is typically around 2-3 times larger than the same file saved from Adobe Photoshop CS3 using the High Quality setting in 'Save for Web and Devices'.
Lightroom does not appear to be generating a preview or anything else that would account for the disparity.
To get Lightroom to shrink files down to the sizes that Photoshop produces, I need to reduce the quality to a level at which the images contain glaring JPEG artifacts.
I'd like to use Lightroom as part of my web workflow, but this is pretty much a showstopper. Exporting to TIFF, then using Photoshop batch actions to try to automate a conversion to JPEG runs into the problem that Photoshop's "Save for Web and Devices" command can't be fully automated (it's not possible to override the save location).
So my questions are:
1. Why is Lightroom's JPEG compression so poor in comparison to Photoshop's?
2. Is there any way to get around this?
3. Is it safe to use Photoshop's standard 'Save as ...' command in place of 'Save for Web and Devices' when preparing images for the web (I have a distant memory that 'Save As ...' used to export metadata that would choke certain browsers, but I don't know if that's still true in CS3).

It looks as if metadata contributes about 4-8K to the image. Photoshop is stripping a large part of the metadata (even with 'include XMP' on), which contributes to the difference, but doesn't explain it completely.
Here are some test results:
Test Image #1: 660 x 440:
Lightroom 2 (60, with metadata) - 170,904 bytes
Lightroom 2 (60, without metadata) - 164,142 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (60, no metadata) - 141,489 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (30, no metadata) - 72,394 bytes
Test Image #2: 660 x 440 (no metadata)
Lightroom 2 (70) - 124,231 bytes
Lightroom 2 (60) - 88,448 bytes
Lightroom 2 (60) - 80,560 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (Save for Web 70) - 94,032 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (Save for Web 60) - 69,654 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (Save for Web 30) - 32,287 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (Save 8) - 93,517 bytes
Photoshop CS3 (Save 7) - 73,067 bytes
However, there's a quality difference to be taken into account as well. Photoshop 60 is about equivalent to Lightroom 70.
To compare the images, I took the original image (scaled to 660 x 440 by Lightroom) and layered the JPEG over it, then set the layer to 'Difference' to reveal JPEG compression artifacts. Lightroom at quality level 60 shows visible artifacts; Photoshop Save for Web at level 60 does not. To get the artifacts to disappear, I have to take Lightroom up to about 70, by which time the Lightroom files are almost twice the size of the Photoshop files.
Just for amusement, I tried Graphic Converter as well. GC is a great program, but its JPEG conversion turns out to be vile: even at a quality setting of 100, the artifacting on fine near-vertical lines is obvious to the naked eye.
Using Photoshop's own 'Save' (rather than 'Save for Web') command yields similar results. quality level 8 in 'Save' appears to be fractionally poorer than quality level 60 in 'Save for Web'.

How to import nef and psd versions of the same file ?

Hi, I am new to this so please forgive any daftness. I am trying to import from a folder with nef and psd versions of the same file. Lightroom does not seem to recognise the nef if a psd exists. In fact if I specifically try to import the nef later, I get the message that says lightroom will not import the file because it already exists. The import is set to keep the originals in the existing location and the database is new. This is the first import I have done and noticed that the file count did not match.
I need to do this because I need to create alternative psd files from the same raw file but I do not see how.
The psd were created via the bridge to photoshop route.
Please what am I doing wrong ?
Many thanks

Hi thanks for the quick reply. For a "database" application that seems a bit scary. Also I have found that it will import psd and tif and jpg versions of the same file which makes it even odder.
Do you know if there is a way to tell it to favour nef rather than psd ?
thanks,

Aperture exports jpeg files larger than original RAW files

Can anyone tell me why a RAW file (10.6mb), when exported as a jpeg (10.8mb) from Aperture ends up larger than the original RAW file. The same RAW file when opened and then saved as a jpeg (6.4mb) in Photoshop is a lot smaller. The photo dimensions and resolution are the same in both saved files (34.5mb open file 300dpi 4256 x 2831 pix). I have tried this on several photos, all with similar results. For information I am saving the photos in both Photoshop and Aperture at 300dpi, original size and at a quality setting of 12. In these examples/tests I have done no work to the photos, obviously the file sizes increase after work has been carried out on the photos (in both Ps & Aperture)
Almost doubling the size of saved jpegs has a massive implication on my library and may be one reason to consider Adobe Lightroom as this gives similar jpeg file sizes as Photoshop, i.e. almost half the size of the original RAW file
Reducing the quality setting on saved jpegs is an obvious way to reduce file size, but not answering the question of the considerable discrepancy when saving to the same quality in different software
Is this a feature of Aperture and nothing can be done about it ? I would prefer to use Aperture but cannot cope with the large jpeg sizes !
Any comments would be much appreciated - thank you
Nick

Think you might be right Allen - The 12 quality saved jpegs seem to be pretty high quality, closer to the original than maybe the files saved in Ps at quality 12. I have just run an identical set of processing actions on all the files in Photoshop and the jpegs previously saved in Aperture at 12, 11 and even 8 quality settings seem to be better than the same files saved at 12 in Ps
Bizarrely the file size drops from 10.6mb at quality setting 12 in Aperture, to 3.2mb when saved just one notch down at quality setting 11 in Aperture. That is a massive drop, esp considering the next one down, saving at quality 10 results in a 2.8mb file
rw just ran some checks and tests on the file export settings and file sizes in Aperture, on a file I sent him, and we get the same results. So at least my version of Aperture is not up the wall !!
Would be useful to have the explanations from Apple as to the vast variance in settings and file sizes, but I guess we will just have to keep guessing - and buying more and more hard drives for all the large files
I am considering keeping the RAW originals in future, and I suppose in this case I need only save smaller jpegs, and issue at whatever size they are needed at the time - just needs a bit of planning to look after an ever increasing collection, which is about to have two sets of images added at a time now. Added to the already amassed 80 000 images at last count !)
Thanks
Nick

Why does viewing the same file in two diff. versions of Photoshop give diff. results?

Hey,
Our designers use CS2 for their work. All of the designs that they work on are in black and white. When the same file is opened at a given zoom %, the files seem to have a different view for CS2 and CC. The print size ofcourse is the same, but our work involves viewing designs of 700 dpi at 3-5% and the difference in viewing the same files matters.
We want to upgrade our software, because CC is way better in so many other functions but this is the only thing that is stopping us from doing so. Please let me know if there's a way to fix this or is it just something we have to accept with the upgrade.
I will share screenshots of both the version with the same file soon.
Thanks.

Thanks for the suggestion, Chris.
Same issue, new question - don't ask me why I did this, but while both Photoshop and the now corrupted file were open, I changed the name of the folder containing the file, then continued to save the open version of the file without first closing it and reopening it from the newly renamed folder. Could this have caused both files in that folder to become corrupted in different ways? The other file that gives me the "file is empty" error was not open at the time, but it was in that folder. I'm thinking maybe by changing the path to the files while Photoshop was running, that could have triggered this. ?? I have 3 1TB internal drives raided to read as 1 drive, so I'm really hoping that one of these disks is not dying on me as you suggested. I was also backing up an external drive using BackBlaze when this all occurred - any possible connection? How can I find out if one of my three raided drives (and which one) might be going bad?
Thanks!!

Why is menu size so much larger than the files?

I am somewhat perplexed - I'm making a single-layer dvd and have a simple single screen theme (no animation) - it has one drop zone. The movie has 28 chapters so there are five of them, but so far I've added only one montage of photos to each menu page - it's a "mobile" quality in media browser and ave only 10 - 20 MB, then one song. On average these movie clips are 1:00 to 2:00 min long and the music is cut to that length. So, all told, it's probably less than 110 MB in files - but when I look at the project properties, the menus are 3301 MB!!!
The movie itself is only 1.1 GB so what is going on?
It's preventing me from doing the project and I've got no idea why it's making the menu size so much larger than the file sizes?
Can you please help me figure out what to do?
Alexa

The 2 min clips were natively 2 min - I had each one separate and actually converted to media browser in "mobile" size (b/c the drop zone was 4 x 6 in size in the theme). They were tiny - in most cases I was shortening the audio (e.g. the song was 4 minutes and I was setting the loop to only 1:30 b/c that's how long the video clip was on the menu).
BUT, to resolve the question (I always like to post the answer) - I ended up duplicating the project to try to reimport the video. It was a fresh iDVD project and I happened to click on the project tree of screens - and, lo and behold, the ENTIRE menu was duplicated for some reason (and the movie, actually). I went back to the original and it was the same! I have no idea how that would happen do you? It only had one main menu screen - and then an entire duplicate menu - which I wouldn't even know how to access if I didn't see it in the project menu tree?
The only think of is that at one point I added a title menu link to the scene selection - it gave me a warning that my menu was more than 12 minutes, did I want to fix or ignore and fix later - which confused me b/c it was under 12 min, then but I clicked ignore. Does that create an alternate title menu and send people back to something else?
Anyway, I deleted the entire extra scene selection menus (5 of them) and it was back to under 4 GB.
So, I was able to burn, but still wondering about creating the "title menu" link on scene selections? It drives me crazy that it doesn't automatically do that so I like to add "main menu" links.
Thanks for your help!
Alexa

Why are ACR PSD files 10-20 percent larger than the same file resaved in PSD?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for