30 Replies Latest reply on Oct 14, 2015 7:19 AM by trshaner

    jpegs are too small from tiff

    brand0x Level 1

      I am exporting a 95 MB TIFF to Jpeg using maximum in all the export settings and I'm getting a 2.5 MB file at the end. Even the camera's jpeg is 4 times that size.

      Lightroom used to produce Jpegs which were much larger. What is up?

        • 1. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
          Per Berntsen Adobe Community Professional

          The size of a jpg depends on the content (busy details - larger size, large flat areas - smaller size), and the quality setting in the Export dialog.

          Do you have Resize to fit checked? And if so, what dimensions have you entered?

          • 2. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
            sarsaxen Adobe Employee (Admin)

            Hi brand0x,

             

            Can you post a screen shot of the export dialog sections labelled File settings and Image Sizing?

             

            Regards

            Sarika

            • 3. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
              dj_paige Level 9

              brand0x wrote:

               

              I am exporting a 95 MB TIFF to Jpeg using maximum in all the export settings and I'm getting a 2.5 MB file at the end.

              Comparing the file size of a JPG to the file size of a TIF is completely meaningless. You have mis-led yourself via this false comparison. There is nothing wrong here. You have received the JPG that fits the criteria of your Export dialog box settings, and its more than likely fine for any reasonable purpose.

              • 4. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                brand0x Level 1

                These are portraits which started as 31 MB raw files and after Photoshop became 95 MB TIFF files. No re-sizing, max jpeg.

                Here is a screen shot.

                • 6. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                  brand0x Level 1

                  I'm not comparing for the sake of it. My client's Print company, Argentum, said they are too small.

                  • 7. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                    Per Berntsen Adobe Community Professional

                    To print an image at a certain size you need an adequate number of pixels, the file size is irrelevant here.

                    The file size of a jpg is NOT an indicator of image quality,

                    The printing company should be asking for minimum pixel dimensions, not file size.

                    • 8. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                      ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                      What are the pixel dimensions of the original TIF and what are the pixel dimensions of the JPG?

                       

                      Maybe the original is too small in pixel dimensions to be printed without noticeable pixilation.  You could resize larger to placate the customer although you’re not really adding any quality to the image.

                      • 9. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                        brand0x Level 1

                        Pixel dimensions are 4446 x 2964 for both the jpeg and the TIF. The TIF is 95 MB anf the jpeg 2.5 MB. I don't much care about the file size per se, but the printer is saying the jpeg is too small. They are a large photographic printer in LA (Argentum), so what is going on here do you think?

                        • 10. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                          trshaner Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                          brand0x wrote:

                           

                          I am exporting a 95 MB TIFF to Jpeg using maximum in all the export settings and I'm getting a 2.5 MB file at the end. Even the camera's jpeg is 4 times that size.

                          Lightroom used to produce Jpegs which were much larger. What is up?

                          First of all this isn't a camera image. JPEG compression works very efficiently on large even-toned areas. The even-toned white background and transparency areas are a large part of the image area–ERGO small JPEG file size. What do the TIFF and JPEG images look like side-by-side at 1:1 Zoom view inside LR? If they are identical there's no issue.

                           

                          The one possible issue I see is if you need a transparent background it will show as white in the JPEG. Only TIFF, PSD and PING file formats support transparency.

                          • 11. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                            ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                            How big and on what medium is the final result going to be printed, and what DPI/PPI?  It may very well be too small.  I would be worried that the JPG artifacts along the edges would be noticeable if you give them a JPG.  Can they take a PNG or TIF?

                            • 12. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                              brand0x Level 1

                              It's a portrait probably printed 10x8. My concern is that the JPEG file at its max is only 3% of the original tif and I can't do anything in LR except make it smaller. This seems odd to me.

                              • 13. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                As has been communicated several times, you're hung up on the wrong thing, the MB of the file on disk.  Perhaps the printing company staff doesn't know how to think about things, either.

                                 

                                TIFs are going to be bigger than JPGs as far as MB on disk because TIF compression preserves pixel values and can only compress so much.  JPG compression is not constrained by preserving pixel values and will change them to make them more similar so the compression can work better, along with add extra noise along edges to preserve the edges while compressing everything else more.  This changing of pixel values make JPG makes it able to compress much better.  Photographs, as you're used to dealing with, have micro detail either from the scene or the noise from the sensor are much less plain than your artificial image, above, so the compression comparison between TIFs and JPGs will be less different.

                                 

                                If the printer won't accept your JPG because it is too small on disk (which means they're also confused) then upsize it by 3 or 4 times (keeping it under 32000) and see if they'll accept it, then.

                                • 14. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                  dj_paige Level 9

                                  brand0x wrote:

                                  ... but the printer is saying the jpeg is too small.

                                  Exactly what is the message?

                                   

                                  Is this some computer hardware or software telling you the JPG is too small, or is this coming from a human saying it is too small?

                                   

                                  It's a portrait probably printed 10x8.

                                  This is somewhat incompatible with the stated image size in pixels of 4446 x 2964 (the technical term is that you have the wrong "aspect ratio"). This may be an entirely separate problem, or not.

                                   

                                  The only way to get 8x10 from this print is for the printer to either crop the image or leave white space on the paper; is this what you are seeing? Or not?

                                  • 15. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                    brand0x Level 1

                                    The "printer" is the professional company which specializes in professional photographic printing, not software, not a printer with an error message. My client is trying to get a print of her portrait and they are telling her the file is too small. They have been told to crop it to conform to the 8X10 aspect ratio.

                                    The original raw file is 4896 × 3264 and is 31 MB, the Photoshopped file is 4896 × 3264 and 95 MB.

                                    I'm wondering why LR exports a jpeg 4896 × 3264 from the TIFF which is 3MB and a jpeg 4896 × 3264 from the RAW of 4.1MB. it seems that the compression applied the TIFF file is MUCH more aggressive than that applied to the RAW.

                                    I'm  not hung up on anything, I'm just wondering why the compression is more agressive.

                                    • 16. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                      ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                      Also, the screenshot, above, is not a portrait, of a person, at least.

                                      • 17. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                        brand0x Level 1

                                        Thanks for pointing that out. It's a screenshot of the settings in the export dialogue as was requested by another contributor.

                                        • 18. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                          Per Berntsen Adobe Community Professional

                                          You are comparing apples and oranges.

                                          Raw files are greyscale files, until they are rendered by a raw converter. That explains their relatively small file size.

                                           

                                          Tiff doesn't use compression by default, but the compression you can use is lossless, and doesn't reduce file size nearly as much as jpg does.

                                          They can also be 16-bit, which doubles the file size from 8-bit.

                                           

                                          Jpg is a lossy compression format, and can create very small files, with quality loss anywhere between unnoticeable and disastrous, depending on the quality/compression settings.

                                          • 19. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                            elie-d Level 4

                                            A 4446x2964 pixel (13.2 MP)  tiff image when written to 16 bit precision is around 75.4 MB, not counting the metadata. A jpg is 8 bit so even before compression it is half the size, less than 38 MB. If it were jam-packed with detail and/or noise the compression at max quality might be 3:1 but more likely would be 4:1 to 5:1, IOW, about 8 MB, but in an image so devoid of detail a compression average of 15:1 to produce a 2.5 MB file is hardly surprising even at Quality 100.

                                            • 20. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                              ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                              Is the printer's rejection something the uploading webpage is saying or is it a human making the judgment?

                                               

                                              Is the 8x10 feet rather than inches?  If the printer is rejecting a photographic image that is really 5000x3200 for an 8x10 inches then find another printer because they have no clue, or upsize it as part of your export and it should be "big enough" for them as long as you use maximum quality.

                                              --

                                              Raw files have one-color-per-pixel where each pixels is 12 or 14 bits and are somewhat compressed.

                                               

                                              A single layer TIF without an alpha channel has 3 colors per pixel and either 8 or 16-bits per color per pixel so could easily be 3 times larger than the raw for the same number of pixels, but you can apply various types of compression to a TIF so it could also be smaller depending on how compressible the image data is.  Smoother is more compressible, more textured or more noisy is less compressible.

                                               

                                              What is different between the image you're starting with as a TIF and the RAW?  The TIF may have already had some noise-reduction applied to it and a smoother image can be compressed more so the filesize will be smaller.  It also might have had the color range restricted and an image with fewer colors can be compressed more and be smaller.

                                               

                                              Without seeing what you're working with it's hard to give better explanations.  

                                              • 21. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                brand0x Level 1

                                                Yes, I know. Unfortunately, I can't upload the original 35MB RAW file or the photoshopped 95MB TIFF file because they are too big.

                                                The RAW file was heavily manipulated in PS and the resulting TIFF was then finished off in LR.

                                                Right now I'm not so much looking for a solution to a problem (I sent the printer the full res TIFFs) as I am an explanation of the much more aggressive compression, even under the same export settings, of the TIFF.

                                                The RAW ended up about 13% of it's original size as a jpeg and the TIFF about 3%.

                                                • 22. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                  trshaner Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                  brand0x wrote:

                                                  I'm not so much looking for a solution to a problem (I sent the printer the full res TIFFs) as I am an explanation of the much more aggressive compression, even under the same export settings, of the TIFF.

                                                  The RAW ended up about 13% of it's original size as a jpeg and the TIFF about 3%.

                                                  resolution - Why are two pictures that are the same dimensions/dpi such different file sizes? - Photography Stack Exchan…

                                                   

                                                  TIFF compression is loss-less, but will also show a variation in file size (to less degree) based on subject content.

                                                  • 23. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                    brand0x Level 1

                                                    I'm compressing from TIFF to jpeg and from RAW to jpeg.

                                                    I'm interested in why the compression from TIFF to jpeg is so much more aggressive than from RAW to jpeg, resulting in a smaller file size even though the original TIFF was much bigger than the original RAW.

                                                    • 24. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                      ssprengel Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                      This has been explained already:

                                                       

                                                      The raw file is a smaller file-on-disk because it only has one color per pixel.  The TIF is a bigger file-on-disk because it has three colors per pixel along with differences in the compression both file formats might have applied to them.  The camera dictates what compression the raw has and you dictate what compression the TIF has.

                                                       

                                                      Both the raw file and the TIF decode in memory to 3-colors-per-pixel, so would be a similar size, but you're apparently doing things to the pixels values from raw-to-TIF-to-JPG that compresses better than raw-to-JPG, right?  If you feel there is nothing different being done then perhaps tell us exactly what steps you are performing, in detail, from the moment you open the raw to when you save it to JPG, and then as you continue on and save the TIF, then open the TIF and save it as a second JPG.

                                                      • 25. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                        Jao vdL Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                        I'm interested in why the compression from TIFF to jpeg is so much more aggressive than from RAW to jpeg, resulting in a smaller file size even though the original TIFF was much bigger than the original RAW.

                                                        It has been explained multiple times already but here it goes again. The file size of the jpeg is a function of the complexity of the image. An image that is really noisy will result in a much larger jpeg file size for example. An image that is just smooth solid colors will be very small. There are several reasons that could explain your observation. First is that some edit you did to the tiff file reduced the noise or other complexity in the image. Second is that you reduced the bit depth of the tiff to only 8 bits. Since the original raw file is usually 12 bits or 14 bits (but with linear gamma), this results in an effective reduction of noise and loss of information because of the quantization in only 256 values for each color channel. This is information that the jpeg doesn't need to encode and therefore will result in a reduction of file size.

                                                         

                                                        Lastly, I would seriously consider moving printing companies. The fact that the jpeg file size does not have much to do with the actual image quality is a very basic fact. They should know this. If your file is visually degraded when you open it in an image viewer you used too strong compression, but if you can't see any degradation when zoomed in anywhere, the file is high enough quality. Usually quality 85 is more than enough and as long as you have enough pixels and use the right color space, the print will be good.

                                                        • 26. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                          wobertc Adobe Community Professional

                                                          Here is an exercise-

                                                          1. In Photoshop create a 'new' blank page image 4000x5000 pixels 16bit, Save as TIFF, no compression.

                                                          2. Save the same image as JPG, 100%

                                                           

                                                          Compare the size results of each saved file.-

                                                          TIFF:     114mB

                                                          JPG:     1.28mB

                                                           

                                                          As stated much in above posts, the simpler the image (in tones) the more compression will appear to be applied to the JPG.

                                                          • 27. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                            Jao vdL Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                            wobertc actually gives a really good example. You could take that same blank image and save with quality 0 and get a file that is only 250 kb or so. The amazing thing about this file is that it is completely identical to the quality 100 version and even to the uncompressed version! It is completely white with no pixels deviating from what they were in the original file (100% white). This is a great example of how file size and quality are not strongly correlated and how small files can still be high quality when you are using jpeg.

                                                            • 28. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                              wobertc Adobe Community Professional

                                                              More experiments-

                                                              1. Export a JPG from a raw image- 100%

                                                              2. Add some "Grain" to the image in Lightroom Develop. Export a JPG again - 100%

                                                               

                                                              Compare the file size-

                                                              1. = 7.54mB

                                                              2. = 12.1mB

                                                               

                                                              ScreenShot080.jpg

                                                              • 29. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                                brand0x Level 1

                                                                Thank you all for your contributions. I wrongly assumed that any post production action would add data rather than remove it. I took a RAW file of 30 MB from LR took it into PS to edit and added a single black line. The TIFF which then saved to LR was 90 MB. I then exported both as jpegs and ended up exactly the same size. Thanks, I appreciate the education.

                                                                • 30. Re: jpegs are too small from tiff
                                                                  trshaner Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                                  At the risk of beating this subject to death below is a very good article that shows the affect of JPEG compression on various subject content images. Using the maximum JPEG Quality setting of 100 should produce no visible compression artifacts in any image! But it does produce very large files sizes with no visible increase in image quality over a lower setting such as 80.

                                                                   

                                                                  Jeffrey Friedl's Blog » An Analysis of Lightroom JPEG Export Quality Settings

                                                                   

                                                                  One artifact you may see in some JPEG images with fine gradient areas is "banding." If you see banding using a 100 Quality setting this is not a compression artifact.  It is due to converting the original raw file's 12-14 bit/color image data into JPEG's 8 bit/color file format. The best solution for images like this is to use 16 bit/color TIFF file format.