Size limit on TIF Files in Photoshop CC

[davidw71556680]

I know that Photoshop will not handle TIF files greater than 4 GB but I get the warning with actual files sizes very much lower and sometimes less than half the stated limit.  If possible I want to avoid the complication of using the psb "big file format" because I want to use Lightroom to manage all  photos in my library.  I'm uisng Photoshop CC 2020 run on a  PC with Windows 7, 32GB memory and a 20TB hard drive so I can't see that it's a problem of process ing capacity.  Has anyone come across the same issue what is the solution please?  Or, is there some  preference to set or hidden lever I have to release?

[Guest]

Moving to the Photoshop forum from Get Started

[Test Screen Name]

This may seem a strange question, but if you can't save the TIFF, how do you know what size it ought to be? You can't use any other measure (e.g. memory usage, pixel dimension, PSB size...) as a reference.

[davidw71556680]

I see your point. Sorry, I wasn't clear.  When I reluctantly accept the option to save it as a psb then it's the size of that file I referred to.  I assumed the TIF file, if it could be saved,  would be no larger. In addition, Photoshop is also showing the  file size, as I work it up with additional layers and before attempting to save it, as well below 4 GB.

[PECourtejoie]

Hello, can we have some specs about the files, pixel dimensions, bit depht, number of layers, big smart objects?

Does it happen on all TIF files?

[davidw71556680]

Hi.  Here is the information for one sample file; pixels 9928x5960, bit depth 16, 21 layers in five groups including one smart layer (a duplication of the base layer) with a filter applied.  Photoshop (in the border ribbon) shows the image size as 339M and the file size as 1.5GB.  As saved the size of the psb file for the same photo  is 1.8GB.  It is happening with almost all files in which pixel layers are added.  

[davescm]

PSB uses Image compression (albeit lossless). Have you chosen an image compression algorithm for TIFF or is it set to "None"

Dave

[davidw71556680]

Hi, I'm not aware of choosing any compression option.  How can I check please?  I can't find it in the "save as" dialog box.

David

[davidw71556680]

Sorry, I've just realised what you meant about compression.  The answer is no, I never apply compression.

[Test Screen Name]

So, you are just assuming that the TIFF should be the same size as the PSB? 

Have you checked this on files which you do manage to save? Please post sizes of both, as saved with your settings.

[davidw71556680]

Yes, that's my working assumptiom. But I just tried the experiment with a 1.5Gb (as reported by Photoshop) file with five pixel layers but no smart objects.   Again no compression.  The comparative saved file sizes were TIF 1.769GB and PSB 1.248GB.  So it looks as though PSB is more efficiently packed being equivalent to 70% of a TIF file.  But if the same logic holds true for all file sizes then I should be able to save TIF files that translate into 4GB x 70%= 2.9GB.  That still leaves a mystery of why Photoshop can't handle by files that end up as only 1.5GB when saved in psb format?

[davescm]

You say you never use compression - does that also apply to psb ? You select compression for psb in Preferences >File handling.

Dave

[davidw71556680]

I haven't used psb until today and not psd for some years.  But in file handling the option "Disable compression for psb and psd files" is unchecked.  Should it be checked?  But surely that would put psb and tif files back into the same size range.

Just in case it's relevant  just below in file handling preferences the option selected for "maximise psd and psd compatibility" is "Always".

[davescm]

With the option unchecked - psd and psb files are compressed using lossless compression. Therefore you cannot compare them to TIFF when you select None as the compression method.
Maximise compatibility saves a flattened layer in the file which is read by Lightroom (for psds)

Dave

[davidw71556680]

OK, I understand.  I have now definatley saved an uncompressed  psb and an uncompressed tif version of the same file.  Comfortingly, they are both now exactly the same size.  But that brings me back to the original problem.  I can't persuade  Photoshop to  save TIF files that well below (at least 50% below in some cases) the limit of 4GB.  Any other ideas?

[PECourtejoie]

Hello, Photoshop can't know how large the size will be, so might be conservative when authorizing to save.

[davidw71556680]

OK, I see the logic but I'm struggling with the idea that the designers built in a 75% comfort margin. Any file above 1GB is being refused against a stated maximum of 4GB.  It also looks to me as though Photoshop does know the size of the file because it goes 99% of the way through a TIF save before declaring it too big.  Since this doesn't seem to be a common problem I suspect it's something very simple I have wrong in my settings or system.  Like searching for the Holy Grail...possibly a long and fruitless journey!

Until I find a solution I have adopted an idea found on another forum which  at least  allows psb files to be "visible" in Lightroom.  I will list the method here in case it is of use to someone else and because I was able simplify things and omit a number of steps without apparent problems;

1. In PS create a new document then File>Place Linked and point to the psb file thereby creating a smart object which will automatically synch with the big document file

2. Save the new PS document as a TIF file in the same directory as the original psb then open LIghtroom and synch that directory so that the image is visible in the library

3.  You can now open the TIF file in Lightroom and send it to PS for editing in the usual way.  When the TIF loads into PS click on the smart layer and the psb file will open for editing.

[davescm]

You might also want to add your voice and vote for the feature request below:

https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom_support_cataloging_psb_files

Dave

[davidw71556680]

Thanks, I have now done so!  It seems I am not alone.  There are others on that forum who have had similar problems albeit some time ago.  They don't seem to have solved it either.