Saving file as PSD or TIFF or maybe something else?

[julius.dru]

Hello,

I have encountered this problem that lately I have more work to do in Photoshop and it is eating my disk space...

For example, I have made several posters in size of 1185x1750mm and they are taking about 1.5-2GB each... Then I had to do some ads banners and 10 of them took 8.5 GB in total... So basically 1 project (1 poster + 10 ads banner) takes about 10 GB...

Is this normal or I am doing something wrong? I understand that a big poster can take some space, but a 300x250 banner taking 585MB is a little too much in my opinion... or am I wrong?

I saw a couple of discussions (sadly they were old, from 2017) that you should always save as TIFF and this would greatly reduce your size... But is it safe and should I be doing this? Won't I lose quality or editability? 

[Imaginerie]

Tiff are safe as long as you obviously save with layers.
Tiff supports alphas, saved paths and RGB/CMYK, 8, 16 and 32 bit images. I have never known an instance of any effect/filter that is not covered by a TIFF saved image, but I may be wrong (no doubt someone will correct me 🙂 ).

Things you could do to avoid big files eating up your space:
- Beware of smart objects with complex images embedded (particularly if you have a gigantic image, embedded in a smaller document. You get the gigabits and you're not making use of them).
- Consider using linked assets instead of embedded, particularly if they are shared assets (complex backgrounds that are found within multiple posters/banners, big images, logos, etc..), also make use of those CC libraries...
- If you're using smart objects but never touch them (eg: no filters, no transformations, no adjustment), consider rasterising them.
- Also, if possible use vector graphic elements over their rasterised counterparts.

I know most of it you probably already know, but just in case 🙂 ...

[julius.dru]

I think this can be a case of my problem... I create a poster first, then I drag all the layers to ads banners and resize everything accordingly...

So if I understood you correctly, if I dragged a big smart object from a 5000x7000 file to a 300x250 file and resize it to fit, saved 300x250 would take the same amount of space because it is using same smart object?

[Imaginerie · Accepted solution]

Yes, that's basically it

I suggest creating multiple size images to be embedded, or better still link the same image everywhere, instead of embedding it.
That way it only takes the space once in your hard drive.
Check that one (scroll a bit)

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/create-smart-objects.html

[julius.dru]

Just wanted to thank you! This linking thing saved an absurd amount of space!

As I mentioned, 1 poster + 10 ads banner took about 10 GB... NOW it takes ONLY 550MB !

1. Poster from 2GB went to 261MB
2. 10 ads banner from 8.5GB went to 11MB
3. Linked file folder takes 278MB

So by using linked files, I reduced my project size by 95%

[Imaginerie]

Glad it helped 🙂
Know that the system is similar in Illustrator and Indesign (In Indesign I would say it's a must to know! Imagine a 52 pages magazine with all the images embedded 🙂 )

The only thing that you must keep in mind is to stay organised. That means you'll have to keep all your linked files in the same place, otherwise you run the risk of having to relink if lost. Same when sharing your files with a client, you need to give them both PSD and linked assets, in the same way you keep them yourself.

[D Fosse]

What you're seeing is the native real size of the file.

What's usually the problem here is that people are used to jpeg, which uses very aggressive, destructive and non-reversible compression to reduce size. Jpeg compression can usually shrink a file down to an astonishing 2-5% (!) of native size.

But there's a price, and that price is so steep that you should never use jpeg as a working format. The file will degrade with every save.

For archival purposes, PSD or TIFF is what you want. Which one is more or less up to you. They are both non-destructive, and support all Photoshop functions and features. TIFF has wider universal support, but PSD offers some advantages in other Adobe applications like InDesign.

Both PSD and TIFF can be (moderately) compressed to bring size a bit down, but nowhere near the scale of jpeg compression - and it won't ruin your files.