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.
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!
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,
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
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
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.