Skip to main content
MikeKPhoto
MikeKPhoto
Known Participant
May 9, 2012
Question

PSD Versus PSB file extensions

  • May 9, 2012
  • 3 replies
  • 35187 views

This may be a dumb question, but what, apart from PSB's ability to handle very large files, are the advantages of one over the other?

Reason I ask is the PS Autorecover file has a PSB extension, which I guess enables the feature to handle any file size. So if it is used to recover your work, why do we need to continue to have two formats. Why not just one?

Just Asking

MK

    This topic has been closed for replies.

    3 replies

    A
    Anonymous
    May 10, 2012

    Besides, it's not just "two" formats.  Adobe also owns or controls the TIFF format and supports all kinds of different formats like GIF, EPS, JPEG, PNG, BMP, Targa, etc., etc.:

    A
    Anonymous
    May 10, 2012

    MikeKPhoto wrote:

    … why do we need to continue to have two formats. Why not just one?…

    Another thing to keep in mind is that Photoshop uses the PSB format to save Smart Objects inside image files, so if you ever save SO Layers to files, you have PSB files.

    Now, you're not remotely suggesting that Adobe drop support for the PSD format, are you? 

    I can't even imagine what motivated you to ask that question. 

    .

    Message was edited by: station_one

    Noel Carboni
    Noel Carboni
    Legend
    May 10, 2012

    I can't even imagine what motivated you to ask that question. 

    The one thing I can think of is that if PSB worked as seamlessly as PSD in all my other tools, I'd probably just save PSB files for all my master file needs, since that would be the simplest way and it would work for everything.

    Funny thing was that when I contacted the FastPictureViewer folks they seemed to assume that PSB would only be used for giant files.  There is of course no necessity for that.

    I wonder if we'll ever exceed the limitations of 64 bits.  Perhaps Skynet will have taken over the world by then.

    -Noel

    Noel Carboni
    Noel Carboni
    Legend
    May 9, 2012

    At first glance what you say makes sense, but there's history involved.

    An advantage to PSD is that more programs can read it, simply because it's been around longer.  That means PSB is less well-integrated into the computing environment in general.

    For example, the codec pack I bought doesn't make thumbnails for PSB files.  IrfanView can't read a PSB.  There are others.

    If enough people request the creators of the other software to add PSB to the stable of formats they work with then we'll eventually get there.

    -Noel

      MikeKPhoto
      MikeKPhotoAuthor
      Known Participant
      May 9, 2012

      I had thought of that, and maybe there will be support for PSB's in the future. But was curious as Adobe uses the PSB extension for PS Auto Recover and wondered if this miight be a future clue for Adobe going forward?

      With the new camera technology I am seeing very large file sizes, really easy with a Nikon D800 NEF and a bunch of layers to begin banging on file sizes of close to 2 GB; and I don't see this changing and probably see even higher resolution cameras in the not too distant future.  So the file size handling will become a challenge that will need to be addressed.

      MK

      Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
      Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices