Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
PNG compression is less effective than jpeg compression. So a jpeg will generally be smaller - but jpeg compression is lossy and non-reversible. So permanent degradation is the price for the smaller file.
Jpeg compression is highly dependent on image content. Flat areas compress much more effectively than busy high frequency detail. So there is no direct relationship between pixel size and file size. It can vary by a factor of 10 for the same pixel size and same compression level.
The long and short of it is that for compressed file formats, file size on disk is unpredictable.
I've no idea what you're doing with Super Resolution. It will double the linear pixel dimensions, producing 4x the total pixel count. This has nothing to do with what format you're saving it to later.
Copy link to clipboard
Copied
Dear d Fosse:
Thank you for the quick response. The DNG file is automatically created by either Lightroom or ACR when I run enhance.
I do not understand why the dimensions for the file are appearing much smaller 0.7MP (1024 x 683) than the JPG created by exporting the same RAW file as a JPG 30.0MP (6744 x 4502). The Magnitude of the difference is the cause for my question (JPG is 43x larger), especially when the DNG file size is so much larger (15x).
This same result occured for 1,000 images