• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers
Exit
1

Why does editing a lightroom photo in photoshop DRASTICALLY increase the file size?

Engaged ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi all,

I was trying out the sky replacement in the latest PS update. I had several tiff files in LR. I had LR open them up in photoshop to replace the sky. All I did was replace the sky, and then saved the files. The original lightroom tif files were 18.5 meg. The files I edited in PS are all around 150meg

 

Is photoshop the one increasing the file size? Or is LR doing that when it sends a copy of the tif file to ps?

Views

563

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 2 Correct answers

Community Expert , Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Sky replacement increases file complexity with several new layers, masks and blend modes. That in itself will increase file size many times over. If you flatten and resave, it will go back down to approximately former size (depending on compression options).

 

Those numbers seem perfectly normal and expected.

Votes

Translate

Translate
Community Expert , Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

TIFF fully supports all kinds of layers.

 

Here's a random flat test TIFF where I used sky replacement. This is the resulting layers panel:

sky_layers.png

 

In this case the file size on disk went from 202 MB to 1.41 GB.

 

When I re-flatten this file, the size returns to 202 MB.

 

A flat file is stripped of a long list of file properties that otherwise increase file size. I'm very used to this size difference between flat and layered files, and I'm not for a second surprised.

Votes

Translate

Translate
Adobe
LEGEND ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Entirely depends on the TIFF options used. The default is uncompressed, I believe, whereas your source files may have used some compression already.

 

Mylenium

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

both versions are uncompressed

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Sky replacement increases file complexity with several new layers, masks and blend modes. That in itself will increase file size many times over. If you flatten and resave, it will go back down to approximately former size (depending on compression options).

 

Those numbers seem perfectly normal and expected.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm not sure how the layers would matter....tifs are already a flattened image arent they? they don't support layers. If i open the edited file in PS again, there are no layers present.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

TIFF fully supports all kinds of layers.

 

Here's a random flat test TIFF where I used sky replacement. This is the resulting layers panel:

sky_layers.png

 

In this case the file size on disk went from 202 MB to 1.41 GB.

 

When I re-flatten this file, the size returns to 202 MB.

 

A flat file is stripped of a long list of file properties that otherwise increase file size. I'm very used to this size difference between flat and layered files, and I'm not for a second surprised.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I take back what I said then 😉 I just reopened the image in PS and the layers are there. I could have sworn last time i did that there were no layers. I just flattened it and saved it and file size is now actually a little smaller then original 18.5 vs 16

 

Thanks for the help/explanation

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Expert ,
Nov 07, 2020 Nov 07, 2020

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

🙂

 

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
New Here ,
Jul 11, 2021 Jul 11, 2021

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LATEST

But, is there a way to keep the file size under 64mb when doing sky replacement? I even flatten the image and it's still too large of a file to share with clients...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines