Photoshop Doc Size Misleading Information

  • 1
  • Problem
  • Updated 6 years ago
This is a follow up to the thread I posted earlier today http://forums.adobe.com/message/4725857

Working on a collage adding images using the "Place Command" and then using Transform/Scale to get the look I needed.

I was working happily away until I finished until I tried to save the document. Before I saved I checked the Doc size which showed . Checked the Doc size which showed 34.3 M/180.5 M, so went ahead and saved as a PSD. Exactly 75% through the save process, Photoshop throws an error that the file is too big to save as a PSD, reports the file size is greater than 2GB - hmm, so went to save as a PSB, but Photoshop was virtually unresponsive. Anyhow, managed to save, and then had to restart Photoshop to get performance back.

My concern is how innacurate the Doc size indication is, I could see it being off by a few MB's but to be off by almost 2 GB is silly and a complete loss of productivity. It almost begs the question that if you have multiple Smart Objects you had better save as a PSB - in fact why not save everything as a PSB?

Why can we not have an accurate estimate of Doc size when using Smart Objects and why does it take 75% of the way through the save process to get the error, and why the resulting performance hit? So can we get this resolved as it is a waste of time to find out so late there is a file size problem

Running Photoshop CS6 with latest patches applied,. Win 7 x64 with 16 GB memory

Here are the screen shots from my original post



Photo of MICHAEL KIRWAN

MICHAEL KIRWAN

  • 68 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes

Posted 6 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 818 Reply Likes
34 Meg is the size of the FLATTENED document without compression - just like the documentation says.

180 Meg is the size in memory (including layers).

Neither of those directly relates to file size because Photoshop does not know which file format you will chose nor which options you will select for that format.

But without seeing your file, I'm not exactly sure how 180 Meg of data grew to over 2 Gig on disk.
Photo of MICHAEL KIRWAN

MICHAEL KIRWAN

  • 68 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
The file size on disk is 2.1 GB.

The document consists of 14 layers. What I did was create a new document 10"x6.67" ProRGB at 300 dpi. Then "placed" the images as smart objects then resized down to about 2" with the layers overlapping for that montage look - the original files before placing were roughly 13"x11" at 240 dpi.

More than pleased to send you a copy just let me know the best method - it probably will take a few hours using my slow DSL connection.

Perhaps another question to ask; "Is there anyway to get some indication of the file size on disk at the time of save to enable one to pick the correct file type, rather than find out you picked the wrong one in the midde of the save process.

Mike
Photo of MICHAEL KIRWAN

MICHAEL KIRWAN

  • 68 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
Commenting on my comment - you cannot go check to see the file size on disk as it has not been saved yet :(

But I can tell you the temp file jumps up by about 2.1 GB (going from 1.1 GB when Photoshop opens and grows to 3.1 GB when this file opens. Maybe just coincidence that the growth in the temp file matches the saved size on disk?

Mike
Photo of Chris Cox

Chris Cox

  • 20280 Posts
  • 818 Reply Likes
You could upload it via Dropbox, Google Drive or similar - then email me the link. Also, try zipping it first -- odds are it'll get smaller.

The scratch space will come close to the uncompressed size of the file, because Photoshop has to allow for all the data to be written to scratch.

What I don't understand is where we're missing the accounting for the in memory document size, or if there's some other odd factor involved.

13x11 at 240 dpi, 8 bit/channel RGB = about 24 Meg each child file.
10x6.67 at 300 dpi, 8 bit/channel RGB = about 17 Meg each layer in the parent file
So that would be around 600Meg in 8 bit/channel, double that in 16 bit/channel.

Somewhere we've got some additional data that you missed.
Photo of MICHAEL KIRWAN

MICHAEL KIRWAN

  • 68 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
OOps should have mentioned the originals are 16 bit RGB, so with your calculation the file would be closer to 1.2 GB

Mike