I Just can't understand why Photoshop can do all the edits without any problems but Lightroom-which Adobe are pushing as 'The' main editing AP-can't do them?-Spot removal is one of the most imports tools in any photo editing suite, seems strange that out of three aps-that can all do exactly the same things-they have different ways of doing them, saving them, importing them and the way they process them.
By @Level42
Photoshop does pixel editing. Edits are baked into the file, and when you have closed the file, there is no way to go back to the original image. This is known as destructive editing – it changes pixels permanently.
Lightroom and Lightroom Classic (and the Camera Raw plugin for Photoshop) do parametric editing – all edits are saved as text, and are applied to a new image when you export or print. (all the work you do in Lightroom is done on previews, not the original image)
This is known as non-destructive editing. No pixels are changed, and the original remains the same.
One click with the Remove tool can generate 25 kb of text or more. So the more retouching you do, the more text Lightroom has to handle to display the preview, and this process is extremely resource intensive.
Another problem I've found is I import an 11MB scan to Lightroom, I edit it and import it to desktop and its now 7.7MB. By the time I finish the edits in Lightroom its going to be about 5MB. Is there a way of saving them without losing so many MBs? I Have the export set to as Large as possible.
The file size of a jpg depends on three factors –
Pixel dimensions
Quality setting when exporting
Image content
Assuming that pixel dimensions and quality setting are constant, image content can have a huge influence on file size.
The jpg format uses lossy (destructive) compression in order to reduce the file size.
Images with predominantly flat, smooth, or out of focus areas are easy to compress, and will have a relatively small file size.
Images with lots of sharp, busy detail or noise are harder to compress, and will have a relatively large file size.
So file size is not an indication of the quality of a jpg. See examples below.
When you export a jpg from a jpg, the file size is almost guaranteed to change.
The quality setting used when creating the original may not be the same as you use when exporting, and even if it is, the file size will probably be different.
Also bear in mind that the exported file is a new file, it is not the same file as the original.
The edits you have done will also affect the file size. Sharpening will contribute to a larger file size, noise reduction will contribute to a smaller file size. But that doesn't necessarily mean that the file will be larger or smaller than the original.
There are several factors at play here.
To assess the quality of any image, view it at 100%. At this magnification, one image pixel is represented by one screen pixel. This is the only magnification that presents you with a true representation of the image.
100% is a reference point. With some experience, you will learn how a good quality image should look at 100%.
450 x 299 pixels, 85 quality, 40 kb
450 x 299 pixels, 85 quality, 141 kb
... View more