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

  • 163
  • Idea
  • Updated 2 months ago
  • (Edited)
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.
Photo of Alan Harper

Alan Harper

  • 457 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes

Posted 8 years ago

  • 163
Photo of louis zand

louis zand

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
why don't support the costumers
Photo of danorstmint

danorstmint

  • 80 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
I feel so silly deleting layers I know I need to try and meet the file size limitations of TIF/PSD. Files are getting bigger we need PSB support or PSD improvement. whats even more frustrating is the info panel that lists the Doc: size is way off from the actual size, and the process waiting for the could not save dialog is painfully long. I am venting because I just spend 40 minutes trying to save one file.... 
Photo of Stephen Newport

Stephen Newport

  • 278 Posts
  • 85 Reply Likes
100% this.

I don't even bother with PSD's anymore because I know they won't make the file size cut 50% of the time. Instead I zip compress TIFFs as that helps with the file-size restrictions, but the saves take so long some times due to the compression, that I have to wait to even see if it will make the cut. If it doesn't I have to begin the process of going through my "backup" layers... "do I really need this..." "hopefully the client likes what I did there and won't regret deleting this option..."
It's silly. 
Photo of danorstmint

danorstmint

  • 80 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
Every day I get this issue... until Adobe's Photo cataloging app will accept Photoshops PSB file I'm left to inefficient workarounds. Files are getting bigger, where is the support Adobe?
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
This is a major issue, AND it is just getting worse. Come on Adobe!
Photo of Dominique Provost

Dominique Provost

  • 25 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
+1. ...no, +100
Photo of Marc Baril

Marc Baril

  • 9 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Yes Adobe please, how long do we have to beg!
Photo of Brian Rodgers Jr

Brian Rodgers Jr

  • 13 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Please add .psb support for Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC.

As a commercial photographer/digital artist using very high resolution cameras, my photoshop build files get to be really big. How big? Big enough to have the need to create .PSB files (Photoshop Large Document Format) in order to keep all of my layers.

I use Lightroom for organizing & processing all of my photo files. The problem is that LR doesn't read the .PSB files. Why is it that Adobe Bridge can see these files, but LR doesn't? It's 2017, shouldn't a program that's called Adobe Photoshop Lightroom support a Photoshop large format file? I think it should. Please add support for .psb files in LR. It would be a tremendous help for anyone working with large format files.
Photo of Alex Furer

Alex Furer

  • 162 Posts
  • 44 Reply Likes
+1 here as well. And that's a BIG 1! I really believe that every file type being written by Photoshop should at least be visible in Lightroom!

That said, and my reason to post here, is that I am doing a lot of large panoramas and startrails with my D810. Those files blow the 2 GB file size limitation in a heartbeat. The way I deal with the startrails, is that I am layering 10 shots of startrails into one PSD document. I then link each of theose 10 layer files into a master document and might add a lightpainting plus other layers on top of it. This way I am mostly capable of keeping things below 2 GB.

But off course I hit the wall with a 70 shot startrail now and I am wondering if a TIFF would keep the linked information??

I am posting this somewhat off topic question into this thread because the main problem is that PSB files are not shown in Lightroom. And with a growing catalog it is impossible to memorize the kind of document used in every shot and in the future I might miss that I layered a PSB file to twiddle around the file size limitation if those files are not visible in Lightroom. Please feel free to tell me to open a separate thread for this question!

Bck to the main topic, PLEASE Adobe, enable the display of all images that Photoshop can create in Lightroom. As others said in this thread, I would not mind not being able to manipulate it in Lightroom. But after all, one of the main features of Lightroom is to catalogue our files! All image files at least!

Or at least close the thread and state that this will never happen, or why it hasn't happened yet please!
Photo of Stephen Newport

Stephen Newport

  • 278 Posts
  • 85 Reply Likes
No no no, they need to be visible AND manipulable in Lightroom! There's no point in having files you can't manipulate, like text, etc. One of the major benefits of Lightroom is being able to focus on the images and the images only... but when you can't work across all of the image types it becomes much less useful!
... but everything else you said +1!
(Edited)
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
I agree with Steve too. But really, Adobe! It is time!
Photo of Ad Dieleman

Ad Dieleman

  • 49 Posts
  • 3 Reply Likes
I totally agree. Lightroom's forte is cataloging images, and with my 42 MP camera these photoshop files all too readily need the PSB format. Please, Adobe, fix this!
Photo of Jim Christensen

Jim Christensen

  • 12 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Adobe, listen up!!  Your customers are serious photographers, and we have serious cameras and computers.  Canon already has a 50MP camera, and Nikon soon will.  When we edit these images on Photoshop, AND we use Smart Object layers, the saved image files can quickly exceed 4GB.  When this happens, we can no longer use Lightroom to keep track of (manage) our images.  We have to invent some insane work-around, because Lightroom does not recognize the image format that your Photoshop program creates!!  Your customers have been asking you to plug this hole for 7 years now!  You've poured resources into that Lightroom Mobile feature (for cell phone photographers), and have left your core users to make-up DIY work-arounds for professional-sized images!  WAKE UP ADOBE.  We need a program to manage our images!  ALL OF OUR IMAGES!!

The clock has been ticking for 7 YEARS now.   You've already lost the cell phone photogs to Facebook, Flickr,  500px, SmugMug, iCloud, Google, etc, etc.   Please renew our faith in your support for professional photogs.  We know and love your programs, but images are getting bigger and Lightroom has not kept up.  Make our day Adobe... SHOW US THE LOVE (and the commitment to your loyal customer base).  We can live without bells and whistles, but the main thing Lightroom does is manage our image library.  This is really important.

- Sincerely yours,
  Jim Christensen
(Edited)
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
I completely agree with Jim! Pleasseeee, make this an update!

And to second what Jim says . . . Lightroom Mobile??? My clients don't pay me to show up and shoot with a cell phone. It's cute, but something I will probably never use . . . . .

Steve Glass
(Edited)
Photo of Sebastian Albert

Sebastian Albert

  • 6 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
This thread has been live for 7 years! Don't think that Adobe really cares about anybody, unless they are starting to sell fewer subscriptions.  
It's ridiculous that LR cannot read their own PSB files, it's an Adobe invention after all. 
If a little feature request is ignored for that long, which would be so easily solvable, I'm starting to question,  why I should keep paying Adobe for not listening to their customer base. 
Just to make a comparison: Question or feature requests to the Capture One team are actually answered by them...
Photo of vc2

vc2

  • 23 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
In total agreement with Jim. For 7 years Adobe has beat around the bush with this. Bridge has been able to read PSB forever, Please add the ability to read PSB to Lightroom. So having PSB may impact performance, but please provide it as an option. With these high megapixel cameras, Canon 5Ds, Nikon 810\850m and Sony a7rii, you can't help but to work in PSB. Please help us here Adobe, don't wait until late 2018....release this asap!!!!.  
(Edited)
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Amen.
Photo of Svein Arild Kristiansen

Svein Arild Kristiansen

  • 4 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
Have now switched LR with Bridge.
Got all my brushes and stuff from LR to ACC, ACC can do the same as LR (at least the develop part, I hardly used anything else than libary and dev), and is way faster
Photo of Charles Bélisle

Charles Bélisle

  • 5 Posts
  • 0 Reply Likes
That's why I switched over Capture One : way more responsive on feature requests and way more used by professional photographers!
Photo of Svein Arild Kristiansen

Svein Arild Kristiansen

  • 4 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
So new LRCC and LRCCC came today, and still no PSB support in any of them.
Photo of Jim Christensen

Jim Christensen

  • 12 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Sigh.... come on Adobe.  Camera sensors are getting bigger, and so are our editing images.  You defined this market... don't fumble it away!
Photo of Brian Rodgers Jr

Brian Rodgers Jr

  • 13 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Definitely a bummer. It's a small update that could have made a really big difference for a lot of people. 
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
Adobe? Are you even there? No one from Adobe has even commented on this thread? Your silence is deafening . . .

Six years? And not even a comment. Please hear our needs? We are talking about a 4 layer photoshop document that becomes a PSB, that Lightroom will NOT read . . . . loyal customers here - we need your help.
(Edited)
Photo of Stephen Newport

Stephen Newport

  • 278 Posts
  • 85 Reply Likes
Pretty flimsy update for an entire year. This is a bummer.
Photo of Brian Rodgers Jr

Brian Rodgers Jr

  • 13 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Maybe we are all posting this request in the wrong place? 
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4500 Posts
  • 1203 Reply Likes
This forum is where Adobe wants all product feedback posted -- feature requests and bug reports.  
Photo of Carson Jones

Carson Jones

  • 14 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I've been using Adobe products professionally for almost 20 years now.  I've made many feature requests over the years (e.g. dark interface, macbeth card profile tool, custom panels - to name a few) and they've typically taken years to show up in a release (Photoshop / Lightroom).  I've never seen a feature request, as essential and intuitive as 'support PSB in Lightroom', go unrecognized and blatantly ignored like we've seen here.

The PSB format is widely used by many users and the request for Adobe Lightroom to support this feature has been around for 7+ years.  Many users use Lightroom as their cataloging software.  Now, not only does Adobe seem to be readying Lightroom for dismantling with the shift to a 'Classic' release, it continues to lag behind in features.  The notion that 3rd party developers (i.e. C1 Pro) support this functionality and Adobe does not, speaks volumes as to Adobe's priorities and practical common sense.  Advanced and Professional users are not a priority to them or we would see the PSB file format supported in Lightroom.  The notion of supporting their own file format is apparently worthy of completely ignoring... for years.

It's certainly time to steer our ships away from Adobe and look to more suitable solutions.
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
On that note, what other softwares do people recommend that have the full cataloging capabilities and editing tools like Lightroom? Thanks.
Photo of Brian Rodgers Jr

Brian Rodgers Jr

  • 13 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
Hey Steve, I've been testing other solutions outside of LR. There are a ton on the market now, but they all have their own caveats:

  • OnOne Photo Raw can read .PSB files, but in my opinion lacks a lot of professional RAW editing features that LR has, for example camera profiles. I think the sharpening is terrible right now. But I like that you can also just use it as a file browser (no cataloging required) just like Adobe Bridge. Overall, OnOne has been listening to feedback and making constant updates, so there's hope...
  • Capture One doesn't recognize .PSB files. It's awesome for tethering, but I hate the overall C1 workflow. If you simply want to open a RAW file in Photoshop, you can do so, but it automatically creates a .psd file and ads it to your working folder, thus creating more files. So if you decide that you don't want to work on that file in Photoshop, you've still created an additional file for no reason. Though, it offers Cataloging abilities, I just use this tool for tethering.
  • ACDSEE is something I just briefly tried out. It's nice because it works as a file browser similar to Adobe Bridge. But my initial impressions is that it felt a little slow
  • Luminar 2018 by Macphun (software developers from NIK Software) looks interesting, but it's not out yet.
  • The only other one I know of is Exposure by Alienskin software. I haven't used it yet. Looks very similar to LR and I know some pro's using this software. I need to look into this one to learn more about it.
Bottom line, there are a lot more options now than there used to be. Everyone likes to work a little differently and has features that they can and can't live without. For now, I keep going back to LR, but it sure would be nice if they would add .PSB support. The easiest work around that I've found to at least get to your PSB files from LR is to right click on the folder and select "Show in Finder" (on a mac). This will at least open the folder and then you can double click on PSB files to open them.
Photo of Itai

Itai

  • 2 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Catalog large files even if editing is not possible.

Catalog large files even if editing is not possible. I recently produced my first gigapixel image only to discover it was too big for Lightroom. Even if understandable, LR cannot process such a file, it would be awesome to have it cataloged so that I can find it if needed and apply keywords.
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4500 Posts
  • 1203 Reply Likes
Check out my Any File plugin, which lets you catalog any file type, including PSBs.  
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
YES!!! Just so we know it there. I don't mind having to open in photoshop, but if I could just see it . . . and Ideally export to different file types. Please adobe.
Photo of Stephen Newport

Stephen Newport

  • 278 Posts
  • 85 Reply Likes
John, 
While your plugin is definitely appreciated, I don't want adobe to believe it is a solution. It should not be an issue to edit a large file in Lightroom, not just catalog it, especially if it is an adobe born file!
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4500 Posts
  • 1203 Reply Likes
"I don't want adobe to believe it is a solution."

I agree entirely -- a plugin can't provide nearly the convenience and ease of use as a built-in solution.  Unfortunately, this request is 6 years old, and moving forward, Adobe has indicated they'll be focusing their LR Classic efforts on performance and editing tools (not Library).  
Photo of Alan Harper

Alan Harper

  • 456 Posts
  • 94 Reply Likes
"I don't want adobe to believe it is a solution"

Stephen, it is clear that Adobe doesn't respond to hectoring. If they did, the cacophony on these pages would cause them to do anything to make us quiet.

My advice is to thank Adobe for building in an extension platform to Lightroom, support the plug-in programmers, and get on with whatever you use Lightroom for. And pray that Adobe doesn't take away functionality while we are still editing and storing photos on our personal computers. (Which for me will probably be decades).
Photo of Dmitry Smolyanitsky

Dmitry Smolyanitsky

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
+1 for me too. Many of my photos done using digital blending of multiple images and the file can get easily get over 4GB. Also I am getting may feet wet with Gigaramas and those also get pretty big in size. I cannot believe this has not been addressed yet.

All Adobe cares is how to charge for the software instead of adding useful features that photographers want. It like Adobe does not want photographers use their product.
Photo of Paul Weinrauch

Paul Weinrauch

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
This should be a non-issue, for a program that claims it does digital asset management, and doesn't support its own file format is silly!
Photo of seanhoyt-dot-art

seanhoyt-dot-art

  • 316 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled update Raw Converter and LR to handle >2GB files.

It's officially 2018. Time to update how large the files can be in LR and Raw Converter. I have 128GB ram and a capable system. Why does LR insist I downsize my files? Why won't it recognize PSB yet? Why is the PSD capped? Why does the pano routine die if it can't fit an image. So many questions. I'm a pano guy. Please expand the limits. PLEASE make PS Camera Raw behave the same as LR. Tired of the same tools having different interactions... IE, scrollwheel in PS doesn't adjust brush size. scrollwheel in LR does adjust the brush size. Get the teams together, settle it. 
Photo of Bruce Bigelow

Bruce Bigelow

  • 2 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
We are a high-end image production facility, and have dealt in large files as long as I can remember, with CGI, Motion and Retouching. We have dealt with professional photographers and advertising agencies for over 22 years. Lightroom is a great product for cataloging and handling files (as well as treating them), and we were hoping to use it widely to search our huge image database, but it cant read some of its own Adobe formats? We find this absurd! Even if it cant EDIT a 14gig PSB file, at least it should be able to RECOGNISE and thumbnail it! How hard is it Adobe? People have been asking here for 6 YEARS, and you have been ignoring them for 6 years. At least be polite and answer people.
Photo of Bruce Bigelow

Bruce Bigelow

  • 2 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
I just got through to Adobe chat by pretending I had an account problem, and after being referred 3 times, I got sent a link that sent me back to these forums where Adobe is supposed to listen to support queries. Catch 22.
Photo of Stu Schaffner

Stu Schaffner

  • 2 Posts
  • 8 Reply Likes
I've never used this particular forum before so I hope I am replying in the right place.  I'm an advanced amateur, yet I have enough image files that are important enough to me that I feel I need a database management system to support storage and post processing.  Although I have used Photoshop for decades and certainly intend to keep using it, I added Lightroom about 5 years ago primarily in order to organize my files.  Of course I also perform some initial image processing steps in LR, but I could easily use Bridge or Capture One for all that.  Adobe has been aware for over 6 years of a looming crisis in file size limits, but has chosen to do nothing so far about it.  That's at least two or three cycles of Moore's Law; it can't be a surprise to Adobe.
My basic problem is that I make complex composites with many layers, all in Photoshop.  This kind of post-processing represents considerable value added over the original raw files. I may work on a composite for several months before I stop changing it.  If I have to keep an elaborate informal system of flattened sidecar files in LR catalogues as surrogates for the Photoshop files, I am likely to stop using LR for database management.  Perhaps this is what Adobe wants, since they have now renamed LR to LR Classic and made the new LR dependent on Cloud storage.  For those of us who sometimes work in hotel rooms, this precludes using the new LR for database management.

I will try to use TIFF when I safely can to store Photoshop files, but if Adobe doesn't fix this problem in the next two years, I will change my workflow to stop using LR. I know one customer doesn't matter, but it looks like many customers have similar problems.
Photo of Steve Glass

Steve Glass

  • 24 Posts
  • 6 Reply Likes
It is absurd that they are not dealing with this, as it is a major issue. I LOVE lightroom, but this issue is a major problem for many of us.
Photo of seanhoyt-dot-art

seanhoyt-dot-art

  • 315 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
RIGHT! They could easily read the file, create a proxy and catalog the proxy and only allow edits on that. Exports would be generated from the PSB. Not sure why they are not connecting the dots here. My computer has 128GB ram. I'm fine if they say "PSB requires 64+"
Photo of Brian Rodgers Jr

Brian Rodgers Jr

  • 13 Posts
  • 10 Reply Likes
I've created a workaround in LR to at least get access to the PSB a little quicker than navigating through the computers OS:

Here's what I have been doing: Create a "PSB" Folder within LR. Then save your PSB file within that folder from within Photoshop. While LR won't see the actual PSB file, it will see the PSB folder, and if you right click on it and choose "Show In Finder" (on a Mac) it will open that folder from within the Mac OS, just double click on it and it will open in PS. This should work on windows as well.

Note: If you don't create the PSB folder in LR, then LR will not see that folder PERIOD. Even if you synchronize a specific set of folders. 
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4546 Posts
  • 1217 Reply Likes
The amount of engineering effort for LR to support PSB is modest at most. 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.

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 impose those same limits on PSBs. (Many, if not most, people who want PSB support in LR need it because their layers cause the 2 GB/4 GB limits to be exceeded, not because they have too many pixels.)
Photo of seanhoyt-dot-art

seanhoyt-dot-art

  • 316 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
heh. Many of my files are well over 512MP... Rodeon Pixplorer and D850 w/50mm panos... 
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4546 Posts
  • 1217 Reply Likes
Increasing the pixel limits significantly might involve much more re-engineering in LR (e.g. throughout the Camera Raw engine).
Photo of seanhoyt-dot-art

seanhoyt-dot-art

  • 316 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
Maybe it's high time to rebuild and optimize the camera raw engine.
Photo of Stephen Newport

Stephen Newport

  • 278 Posts
  • 85 Reply Likes
Agreed, its not like there hasn't been time to get this working, it's taken the photo industry 14 years to go from 12MP standard to 45MP standard, and that's if you totally disregard the Pro pro guys that have been shooting 60-120 for years, it basically makes Lightroom unusable for them for any sort of comp workflow. 
But the 65,000px limitation is besides the point. I can open a PSB in Lightroom if I flatten it first and save it as a compressed TIF in PS. Why can't Lightroom work with a flattened proxy so I don't have to maintain two different files and multiple saves every time I make a change to a PSB?
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4546 Posts
  • 1217 Reply Likes
"Why can't Lightroom work with a flattened proxy"

That's exactly how LR works with multi-layer PSDs.  When you have the Maximize Compatibility option checked (required to work with LR), Photoshop saves a hidden "compatibility layer" in the PSD that's a flattened copy of the image, and LR reads that compatibility layer. LR chokes on PSDs that don't have it.
Photo of moyer921

moyer921

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
Agreed!  With higher MP cameras becoming normal I'm hitting that 4gb limit more and more often when stitching even moderate to small sized panos.  I do all my cataloging/sorting with LR.  What's the point in using LR for that if it can't catalog/sort a file type I use often?
Photo of David Richardson

David Richardson

  • 113 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes

Just adding another vote for this.
At one time it was only occasionally that I needed to use psb but with larger camera image sizes as the basis for multi-layered files, I use psb more and more often. I don't pretend to understand the development and engineering implications of adding psb - but after 7 years it hard to believe that Lightroom still will not catalogue  Adobe's own image format.
Please Adobe - add this functionality and allow us to keep using Lightroom as our DAM of choice.

Dave

Photo of Jim Christensen

Jim Christensen

  • 12 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
I've posted this concern / request / plea also (on a different thread, years ago).  Adobe has made some strange business decisions over the years, but supporting your core customer base remains a sound business practice.  We need to manage our digital images and videos... please don't abandon us Adobe and drive us to another software vendor!

BTW - I'm using a workaround that's a Lightroom plug-in.  It's nowhere as good as real PSB support, but automates the manual workaround I was using.  Here's a link. http://www.johnrellis.com/lightroom/anyfile.htm

- Jim
Photo of Terry M

Terry M

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
I just went and bought On1 instead of renewing my "cloud crap." Hopefully, this will work better than Lightroom and Bridge for me.
Photo of Svein Arild Kristiansen

Svein Arild Kristiansen

  • 4 Posts
  • 2 Reply Likes
I have been using Brige to come around this problem, but yesterday Bridge stopped working too, wont load, no splash screen, tried to reinstall 5times, the old versions wont work ether, latest W10.So with Brige not working for who knows how long and LR still not supporting PSB files......
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4546 Posts
  • 1217 Reply Likes
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.
(Edited)
Photo of seanhoyt-dot-art

seanhoyt-dot-art

  • 316 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
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.
(Edited)
Photo of John R. Ellis

John R. Ellis, Champion

  • 4546 Posts
  • 1217 Reply Likes
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.
Photo of seanhoyt-dot-art

seanhoyt-dot-art

  • 316 Posts
  • 51 Reply Likes
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.
(Edited)