Problem with JPG size when saving from RAW

[Iva5EDB]

Hello everyone! Wanted to ask for your help/advice. I am having trouble with saving raw to jpg after the latest Photoshop update (23.0/Camera Raw 14.0), MacOS. When I open a Camera Raw file to edit it, it has all the data I expect, and it is the appropriate file size – approx. 44MB. However, after editing and saving it to a 300dpi JPG, the final file size seems far too small now – between 4 – 8.8MB in comparison to 20MB and higher I was getting before. I have saved the files at the highest image options (Maximum 10-12). If the same file is then opened and saved from Photoshop, again in the highest Image Options quality and Format Options as Baseline (Standard), the size is reduced even more down to 500kb – 1MB!

When I try to open, edit and save the same file in latest version of Lightroom, the final size of JPG is almost 23 MB.

I was playing with Camera Raw Preferences and tried several settings there (Adobe Default vs. Camera Settings + checked Override master settings for specific camera) – but the JPG sizes varied only a little (8.2 – 8.8MB) so still very far from “before update” sizes.

I have tried uninstalling latest Photoshop/Camera Raw version and process and save the file from the older version (22.0), but also older version on my Mac is now reducing size in the same way.

I have Installed 23.0 once again, restarted computer – still same results.

I went through “what is new in Photoshop” with the last version but there is no mention about significant change in sizes of saved JPG files. I tried searching discussions on Photoshop Support web but haven’t run into any discussion thread on this topic. So I am officially experiencing desperation level neverending.

Can someone help explain what I am doing wrong. Camera used - Canon R5.

[Iva5EDB]

Here are printscreens of image size info from workflow from both Preferences/Camera Raw/Workflow and Save option while in Camera Raw. I tried different Color Space setting but the size differs only slightly, both far from 23MB. Also i attached print screens with basic info about RAW and JPGs so you can see that when i saved it on Oct 7th I got JPG 23MB and when I opened the same RAW not adding any edits and only saved it now I am getting much smaller JPG.
I was over 3 hours on call with Adobe Photoshop Support yesterday and they actually didn't give me answer if this is ok. And they were definitely not aware of any changes to algorithm. They uninstalled and installed again the whole Photoshop then uninstalled only Camera Raw modules back to 2 versions back and made me try the workflow again, then reinstalled the newest version of Camera Raw again....And after 3 hours they told me they are keeping my case open for further investigation.

[D Fosse]

There is no reason to spend any more time and energy on this.

The difference is because they are either different images, or you don't have the same sharpening and noise reduction applied. The latter is more than enough to explain the difference!

The size itself seems perfectly normal. Just take this as a demonstration piece on how jpeg file size isn't a useful indicator of anything. If a cat crossed the road as you went in, the jpeg increases by 10MB. It really is on that level.

Oh, one thing: don't set ACR to open into "Camera RGB". It should always be a standard profile, no exception - sRGB, Adobe RGB, ProPhoto. Perhaps even DCI-P3 which is on its way to becoming a standard.

[Iva5EDB]

I was kindly asking for help to understand why i am suddenly getting different outputs from my Camera Raw. If it is not worth your energy/effort or thoughts that is perfectly ok and you don't need to reply or/and comment it. But I still want to be sure there is nothing wrong on my side (either because of my bad understanding/wrong settings or some technical issue in my version) and will be grateful for insights and advice from professionals in this community. Because obviously I am just not able to get the same jpg size now.  And if all my jpgs were before of size 20-30MB and now all of them are 4 - 10MB then something must be set differently. And I cannot move on without knowing what was the culprit and how to fix it to get the same results again. Of course if this all is not new behavior/new algorithm of CR but since Adobe Photoshop Support didn't confirm me this  yesterday and spend 3 hours with me trying to figure this out than it more looks like an issue on my side. I believed that this is space where you can raise a question and ask for help and advice from experts even though it might look uninportant to some.

[Iva5EDB]

And just to add - it is not about sharpening and/or noise reduction. If I only open RAW, DO NOT edit it at all, DO NOT touch any sliders, DO NOT apply any presets, just save it to jpg and I got this small JPG. If I continue to Photoshop with the same file (pressing button Open in the right bottom corner of Camera Raw), there again I DO NOT edit, don't touch there anything, only go to Save as, choose .jpg and the saved result is twice bigger than result from Camera Raw. If i do the same in Lightroom the jpg size is twice as big as the size from Camera Raw and the same as from Photoshop. Before i was getting approx the same size from all three. So why now Camera Raw is behaving diferentlly and what do i need to adjust in settings or? to be getting same results again.

[RP23]

Iva5EDB, I just wanted to say I was searching the internet because I have been thinking the same thing- that my JPGs seem to be a lot smaller now when saving from a much larger raw file. I always do Adobe RGB or ProPhoto RGB and 16 bit while working on my raw photo. I am not sure why everyone is telling you to quit worrying about it. I also understand images vary depending on the content of photo. But I shouldn't go from a 30 MB to a 3 MB. Who wants to order a 20" x 30" print from a 3 MB file?? If a lab takes a TIFF that is one thing but some do not for certain things. 

[Michael Scott Photography]

I appreciate you asking the quesiton you did and agree that this should be a place to ask questions without worry of someone being condiscending.  I also export raw images to jpeg highest quality which result in 15-20MB jpeg files if a client wishes to purchase a print right for standard 8x10, 8x12 etc.  Our wedding photographer sent us an entire batch of terrible photos that she exported at 350 to 400 dpi, 4000x6000 dimensions and 11"x19" roughly as the suggested print size.  These images are only 3.5MB and once we cropped in a small amount the image fell apart and lost all detail.  She swears she is editing in 24bit depth and that "per google" a high rez image is anything above 300dpi and that 4000x6000 should be suitable for cropping and printing.  The only solution I've come up with is that she is either knowingly or unknowingly exporting with the image quality slider set to around 50%.  I've read and googled to the point of teetering on insanity because everyone has an opinion and the cocky ones who seem to "know it all" are the ones who swear MB's don't matter.  Well according to the print department at BayPhoto and every other printing company I spoke with, the file size does in fact matter when it comes to the amount of data, pixels, image quality (basically all the things), but I guess one could argue that's just their opinion and they don't know what they're talking about...... (I'm more likely to side with the guys who work in image printing than someone on a message forum).  Thanks again for your post!  Happy holidays!

[RP23]

Wow D Fosse, that was pretty snarky. Some of us do know how things affect images. I think anyone who has ever used Photoshop will tell you there have and seem to always be glitches or odd changes with updates. It would be pretty crazy to say it could never be the program causing something odd. I really don't think not sharpening a photo causes it to be 3 MB vs 12 MB or more. If you don't want to spend any time and energy helping someone, then please don't waste time typing a response. Move on to something that interests you. 

[Ellie312439594cgu]

Did you find our what is causing this? I am about to throw my laptop! When I have a 19mp photos convert to 7mp, thats an issue when I work for a company that needs 10mp or above unedited. So, I really could use your help if you resolved it!

[D Fosse]

What causes this is the jpeg compression algorithm. It works much more effectively on flat, smooth areas than on busy high frequency detail. Hence, file size varies with image content.  The difference can be dramatic, 10 x or more in some cases.

In short, it's jpeg, not Photoshop.

[Rubberlegs]

Hi, I have been having identical problems and have done exactly the same as you but with nil success. Older photos which I saved as Photoshop jpegs which were about 20mb are now saving as 450kb. I have read everything but to no effect. I tried to have a photo enlarged and printed but the printing business said the resolution was too small and I cannot increase the resolution any more. Very frustrating to say the least.

[D Fosse]

@Rubberlegs 

You're mixing up resolution and file size. Those two are very different things.

The jpeg file format uses very aggressive data compression to reduce file size on disk. It normally shrinks a file down to 1-10 % of native uncompressed size. This has nothing to do with resolution. The size reduction depends on compression level, but notably it also depends on image content, by a factor of up to 10x or more.

The point is that jpeg file size says almost nothing about resolution.

This dramatic size reduction comes at a price. Jpeg compression is destructive, non-reversible and cumulative. A jpeg should be treated as one-off final delivery when bandwidth is a limitation (such as for web).

[Rubberlegs]

Thanks. If you have converted an edited raw photo in Adobe Camera Raw and opened it in Photoshop how do you save it to get the best resolution for printing a large print?

[D Fosse]

Just keep an eye on the pixel dimensions and don't downsample to less pixels. That's what determines how big it can be printed.

Any good quality file from a fairly recent system camera - say, 24 megapixels and up - will have sufficient resolution for large format printing. The bigger it is, the farther away it will be seen from, so there's normally no need for more pixels at large sizes.

[Rubberlegs]

Thanks.