Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family
alan_harper's profile

479 Messages

 • 

10.5K Points

Thu, Aug 11, 2011 7:04 AM

Implemented

174

Lightroom Classic: Support cataloging PSB files (files larger than 2 GB PSDs and 4 GB TIFFs)

Lightroom should catalog psb files, just as it does psd files. I have many psb files that are not over the 65,000 pixels per side or 512 megapixel limits, but are larger than the 4GB limit on psd files, and it would be nice to see them in Lightroom.

Responses

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

2 years ago

To recapitulate past discussions in this topic: The amount of engineering effort for LR to support PSB is modest at most. Supporting PSB in LR is not practically constrained by the SQLite database, nor by the larger file size of typical PSBs, nor by the cost of building previews.

The PSD and PSB formats are nearly identical, the only difference being that PSB uses 64-bit file offsets where PSD uses 32 bits. For my PSB Quick Look plugin, I modified ImageMagick's PSD module to read PSBs and only had to change less than a dozen or so lines.

The SQLite database used for catalogs includes references to files, not the files themselves, so inserting a reference to a PSB has the same cost as to a PSD.

The file size of PSBs can get very large, much larger than the 2 GB limit for PSDs and the 4 GB for TIFFs. In practice, many, if not most, users hit that limit by introducing additional layers, not by having very large pixel dimensions. For example, a single layer of a 50 megapixel 16-bit image takes 300 MB, so a 2 GB PSD allows just 5 layers (plus the compatibility layer).  Some people do hit the file size limit with panoramas, e.g. a 4 x 2 panorama stitched from 50 MP images would be about 400 MP, and a single 16-bit layer would take 2.4 GB.

The cost of building LR previews for PSD/PSBs is proportional to the pixel dimensions, not the number of layers. LR reads the single hidden compatibility layer of PSDs, which is the flattened composite of all the layers. Thus, the cost of building previews for PSBs is the same as for PSDs of the same pixel dimensions. For example, building a preview of a 20 GB PSB that's 330 MP / 16-bit / 10 layers would take the same amount of time and uses the same amount of storage as a preview of 2 GB PSD that's 330 MP / 16-bit / 1 layer.

LR already imposes maximum size limits on all photo types, 65,000 pixels on a side and no more than 512 megapixels, and it could easily impose those same limits on PSBs.  512 megapixels is an order of magnitude larger than the output from nearly all professional cameras, allowing most users a comfortable margin for building panoramas.

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

NICE writeup man! I'd like to advocate going well beyond those dimensions. I have hundreds of 1000-4000 MP files which I sell as acrylic prints 96"+ wide online as a business. I just semi-completed a recent shot that is 26GB.

As a professional using this professional software, I'd really like Adobe to weigh in here.

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

I think there are more users like you in recent years. I think increasing the pixel limits, however, could be significantly harder engineering than allowing for PSBs, since the performance of the Camera Raw engine is directly proportional to the number of pixels.

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

Right, and that's frustrating since I keep investing $5000 in hardware ever few years. I'm sitting here with a massive computer that laughs at LR/PS requests. I know it's malicious, but it feels like these apps are 10% efficient....  It's been a while, but I do remember seeing GPU demosaicing research using CUDA. Related, I can pull in 40 NEF files from my D850 to PS and it takes an hour to output a result. PTGUI takes <5 minutes using my GPU.

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

The engineering effort to accommodate PSBs is minimal: 
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom_support_cataloging_psb_files?topic-...

I learned this while implementing the PSB Quick Look plugin.

2K Messages

 • 

23.9K Points

Even if it were not minimal, it is something Adobe should have done a long time ago. There's no excuse for not supporting a native Photoshop file format IN Adobe PHOTOSHOP Lightroom. No excuse. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

12 Messages

 • 

310 Points

100% agree, I don't think Adobe listen to their customers.

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

2 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Raise the roof - Let me work on PSD that are > 2GB. Also let me open PSB in LR. T....

Surely the 2GB limit is an older hardware limit? I was working with a large PSD in PS and I pasted in a small item to overlay and it doubled the size of the PSD. What's going on there? PSD is not keeping track of layer data and then using instructions to recombine? I can save it all in PSB but >> then I can't work it in the raw converter nor Lightroom which has vastly superior image adjustment options. I want to know when PS and LR will be useful again for me. My company builds and prints very large panoramic prints. 

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

"Let me work on PSD that are > 2GB"

The PSD file format inherently limits the maximum file size to 2 GB, because it uses 32-bit integers to represent offsets within the file (2^31 ~ 2.15 GB). The only way to increase that limit is to use larger integers in the file format, which is precisely the PSB file format.  Thus, to handle Photoshop files larger than 4 GB, LR needs to be able to read PSBs, which is a very modest amount of engineering.

For files of size between 2 GB and 4 GB, saving in TIFF format works well, and LR can read and edit those TIFFs. But obivously, it would be better if you could just use PSB format in all Adobe programs and not worry about file sizes.

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

"I pasted in a small item to overlay and it doubled the size of the PSD. What's going on there? PSD is not keeping track of layer data and then using instructions to recombine?"

This is best posted as a separate topic in the Photoshop category. When multiple feature requests are combined in one topic, Adobe and other users tend to miss them.

52 Messages

 • 

836 Points

2 years ago

And to add another take to this, I've been scanning hi-res images and three or four images into this the maximum for tif becomes 2.4? Not even near 4 gb. So I wind up here with asking for Adobe products to support Adobe file formats.

5 Messages

 • 

114 Points

2 years ago

Can Adobe create a new version of the psb format that contains a preview so that LR does not have to build it on the fly, allowing them to overcome the issues with displaying them in LR catalogues even if they still needed to be edited in Photoshop?

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

The PSB format is identical to the PSD format, except that it allows for larger file sizes. Both formats already contain such a preview, the so-called "compatibility layer", which is a composite of all the visible layers. LR uses the compatibility layer to build the catalog previews of PSDs.  The engineering effort to do the same for PSBs is minimal -- see here for more details: 
https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom_support_cataloging_psb_files?topic-...

12 Messages

 • 

310 Points

2 years ago

The original request was 8 years ago to ask Adobe to support their own format in Lightroom. Like many other photographers I run into the size limit often when using a high megapixel camera and doing focus stacking, exposure blending in Photoshop.

ON1 has no problems working with PSB files and I am having to consider switching products.

I wish Adobe would make it a priority, add this request to the just do it list and release support for PSB with the next update.

6 Messages

 • 

238 Points

The truth is, we threaten we are going to switch, but not enough people actually do it.

12 Messages

 • 

310 Points

2 years ago

Just noticed I had replied to this thread but not voted as my original post had been merged with this thread. Wonder if there are others who haven't voted too?

If this thread had more votes maybe Adobe would increase the priority of implementing it?

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

More votes always help to get Adobe's attention (of course, votes are just one factor among many in Adobe's decision-making). But note that this request, with 155 votes, is already very popular, the 13th most popular unimplemented feature request. 

Champion

 • 

5.6K Messages

 • 

98.1K Points

1. In the search box for this forum, search for "lightroom".

2. In the search results page, click on Advanced Search.

3. In the search box, delete "lightroom" and set these exact settings:



4. Click Search.

6 Messages

 • 

238 Points

I have tried posting this thread to other Lightroom forums and tweeting the link as well. We should all trying get this thread in front of as many people as possible.

83 Messages

 • 

2.4K Points

if only Russian trolls used PSB this issue would be the #1 issue and be fixed by now

83 Messages

 • 

2.4K Points

2 years ago

8 years?!? Come on Adobe, support your files already..... please 

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

2 years ago

If it helps, as a stopgap, I have been using a "link' method to edit the PSB file in LR by creating a single-layer TIFF with linked PSB. Any changes to PSB get passed to the TIFF. There's a youtube video on the process. 

57 Messages

 • 

834 Points

2 years ago

Thanks for having started this thread. -  But isn't it instead of "should" much more a complaint "Why does Lightroom Classic (I never work with the other one) not catalog PSB files?" - Incompatible within their own environment... It's completely incomprehensible to me. - Honi soit qui mal y pense...

292 Messages

 • 

6.4K Points

2 years ago

8 years......

6 Messages

 • 

118 Points

Yeah, same like the preview for the Radial and Zoom blur filter. Once found somewhere a complaint on this dated 2004. That's really quick offering solutions on customer enhancement requests and a perfect demonstration of Adobe's amazing customer awareness (may contains sarcasm). I apply that filter in Affinity Photo. Way more convenient. In Photoshop you must still guess the center and do the try and error game utillising a smart object. Just compare, 1. is Ps CC 2019, 2. is Affinity Photo 1.7.x (but it was already there in all prior version):

Ps CC 2019, tool in cool A.D. 1997 or so style


Affinity Photo's tool. 40 bucks, no subscription. As long you don't click Apply, you can move the centre anywhere without any latency. It's one of the very rare destructive filters of AP, so, make a layer copy first. However: because mostly there is a detail you do not want to have blurred in the centre, you normally mask it on a separate layer anyway:

6 Messages

 • 

118 Points

Sorry, first posting did only show up empty text, because the forum software does not accept emojis and rejects all content... Now text and example images are in...

2 Messages

 • 

82 Points

2 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled How can I use PSB within LR?.

How can I use PSB files within LR CC? Currently I convert them to TIFF and import this to LR. It is strange to me that Adobe doesn't support its own image file format in LR.

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

There's a way. Hit up youtube for the walkthrough. You can open the PSB in PS, then do some sort of export as reference to a PSD single-layer then import that to LR and all changes you make to the PSB in PS will be propagated to that PSD. 

2 Messages

 • 

92 Points

2 years ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled PSB not supported by Adobe Lightroom Classic?! - Ridiculous!!!.

Adobe!!!! - It is ridiculous and insulting to photographers that Lightroom Classic does not support your own "psb" file format!!! Shame on you!

26 Messages

 • 

434 Points

a year ago

Yes indeed

9 Messages

 • 

182 Points

a year ago

This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Give us PSB support.....

We need PSB support or a different solution for LR...

9 Messages

 • 

182 Points

a year ago

This is getting embarrassing for a company like adobe... it has been ages and modern cameras hit the limit so easily.

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

Yeah, but while it seems like an easy fix, I think it would take some considerable re-coding to expand the variables to allow PSB. That's the roadblock. Maybe something like LR9 will have it? For now, there is a workaround if you absolutely need LR editing of a PSB using "Linked Smart Objects"

9 Messages

 • 

152 Points

and yet Adobe seem to have the resources to create a whole other version of LR no one really asked for!!! I think that the Photoshop format is seriously outdated anyhow. Right now the slowest part of my workflow is saving Photoshop files in either PSD or TIFF files. 

161 Messages

 • 

4.2K Points

I think the complex recoding argument falls down after 8 years, which is now the age of this request. PSB is after all Adobe's own file format and , as Christopher says, modern cameras hit the limit easily.

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

4GB? Easily? I do hit it but with 20-image pani stitches. Not “easy”. But I’m onboard with psb in LR

425 Messages

 • 

7.9K Points

Amit - speed it up by unchecking psd compression. It’s 10x faster without.... if you have the disk space.

9 Messages

 • 

152 Points

but then it is bigger than the limit much faster. 

2 Messages

 • 

74 Points

seanhoyt-
It’s easy to exceed the limit doing large abstract composites. I often have over 20 layers, including some smart objects with applied filters and others with masks and multiple adjustment layers. All sized for print at 24”x36”x300ppi. The files get big fast.

2 Messages

 • 

74 Points

seanhoyt-
I wasn’t familiar with linked smart objects though. Will try that, see if it’s something that helps. Thanks.

9 Messages

 • 

152 Points

My Sony A99ii shoots 42MP, I need to switch to TIF if I do major editings on it. The ArIV shoots 61MP and up to 240.8  with pixel shift. That's a lot, even without any major editing.

161 Messages

 • 

4.2K Points

@seanhoyt-dot-art. Yes easily when building up layers. I often combine camera images with 3D multipass renders (at the same resolution as the camera) so exceeding 4GB is very easy indeed.