Photoshop Saving Methods

9 years 6 months ago #403091 by JeremyS
I'm trying to figure out where I am losing quality in my photos. I begin my processing with a 40MB Raw File, process into Lightroom which then moves the image into CS6. Once into CS6 I do my edits and I save back into lightroom. My typical lightroom only saves are roughly 6-12MB in size, however when I bring an image into photoshop, it decreases the size to 1-3MB. I save it as a TIFF file however my settings mustn't be optimal. How do I change it so I don't lose any image quality at all?


,
9 years 6 months ago #403099 by garyrhook
RAW files contain additional information that may not translate to any other format. It may (probably will) be dispensed with.

TIFF files can be compressed (lossless, but compressed). RAW files are not because compression takes processing cycles and time; who's got time for that when shooting?

What happens when you use PSD files?

By what criteria have you determined that you're losing quality? File size is kinda irrelevant. Format is what matters.


Photo Comments
,
9 years 6 months ago #403115 by JeremyS

garyrhook wrote: RAW files contain additional information that may not translate to any other format. It may (probably will) be dispensed with.

TIFF files can be compressed (lossless, but compressed). RAW files are not because compression takes processing cycles and time; who's got time for that when shooting?

What happens when you use PSD files?

By what criteria have you determined that you're losing quality? File size is kinda irrelevant. Format is what matters.


I can tell I'm losing quality because if I repeat this process a couple times, going back into lightroom then further editing etc. the file eventually has obvious banding. EX: that photo of the osprey you edited up and showed us how you edited it. I tried a few different ways before and I'd change it afterwards. I ended up with a banded sky and awful quality. That is my basis of determining that I'm losing quality.


,
9 years 6 months ago #403138 by Shadowfixer1
Are you working in 8 bit or 16 bit. Pushing pixels around too much in 8 bit will produce banding much quicker than 16 bit. I don't think the file type is your problem. I think your adjustments are too extreme for the file you're working with.
,
9 years 6 months ago #403145 by JeremyS

Shadowfixer1 wrote: Are you working in 8 bit or 16 bit. Pushing pixels around too much in 8 bit will produce banding much quicker than 16 bit. I don't think the file type is your problem. I think your adjustments are too extreme for the file you're working with.


My edit's consist mainly of stitching two exposures together, or dodging and burning. Nothing extreme and no major changes. Portraits will usually have some minor touchups done but that shouldn't cause that. 

The reason why I'm bringing this up now is because I brought this image  into photoshop for some sharpening and slight dodge/burn. The image which typically would be 6-12MB ended up as 1.2MB. That doesn't make sense to me if my typical JPGs are 6-12MB with a 95% image quality on Lightroom, and when they go into Photoshop they turn into 1.2MB JPGs.


,
9 years 6 months ago #403146 by Shadowfixer1
How many pixels are in each image. Look at that information and tell us if they are different.
,
9 years 6 months ago - 9 years 6 months ago #403147 by JeremyS

Shadowfixer1 wrote: How many pixels are in each image. Look at that information and tell us if they are different.


There is fewer pixels in the edited image because it has been cropped. That still doesn't account for 10MB of Data dissappearing. I can understand the size going from 12-16MB down to like 6-8MB but not 1/10th. And this is just that example.

I can take other examples where I've done some dodging and burning and no cropping and the same thing happens. The File size is by far smaller than what the original JPG looks like. 

Basically what I'd like to know is, where is the menu to set your save settings in Photoshop?


,
9 years 6 months ago #403150 by Shadowfixer1
I get the cropping part. Need to verify pixels first before worrying about the next step. One step at a time.
,
9 years 6 months ago #403151 by JeremyS

Shadowfixer1 wrote: I get the cropping part. Need to verify pixels first before worrying about the next step. One step at a time.


The Pixels in the original is 7360x4912. While the cropped is 1794x1435. 


,
9 years 6 months ago #403152 by Shadowfixer1
There is your problem. You go from enough information to print a 16 x 24.5 @ 300DPI to 4 x 6 @ 300 DPI. The file type isn't the problem. The exporting of the Lightroom file into Photoshop is the problem unless you actually cropped it that much. If you did crop it that much, well that's just too much.
,
9 years 6 months ago - 9 years 6 months ago #403155 by Shadowfixer1
Forget about the end file size when you look at it in explorer. It doesn't really matter. Look at the number of pixels and where that changes so drastically and you will pin point the problem and the solution. 

PS. Go to "preferences" in Lightroom under the Edit header and check your settings. More specifically, check "External Editing" settings.
,
9 years 6 months ago #403158 by JeremyS

Shadowfixer1 wrote: Forget about the end file size when you look at it in explorer. It doesn't really matter. Look at the number of pixels and where that changes so drastically and you will pin point the problem and the solution. 

PS. Go to "preferences" in Lightroom under the Edit header and check your settings. More specifically, check "External Editing" settings.


This is what my external editing settings looks like. I'm thinking I should bump my resolution to 300ppi. 


,
9 years 6 months ago #403171 by Shadowfixer1
Those settings are fine. The problem is not there. It must be in Photoshop somewhere. How much are you cropping?
,
9 years 6 months ago #403174 by JeremyS

Shadowfixer1 wrote: Those settings are fine. The problem is not there. It must be in Photoshop somewhere. How much are you cropping?


In that example of a photo roughly 80%. Which is probably the most extreme crop ive ever done. It still wont explain other situations where the same thing happens.


,
9 years 6 months ago #403178 by garyrhook
For what it's worth:

A) Use PSD.

2) Don't crop in PS. There's no need.

C) Don't save/export in PS. There's no need.

Here are my settings:



Note that use of 16 bit mode and ProPhotoRGB. That will preserve as much info as possible. I also use the 64-bit version for more data space in memory.

I can't imagine why anyone with LR + PS would do anyting except:
  1. Edit in LR, doing absolutely everything you can there. If you are planning on stitching, make your adjustments and copy them to the other pieces. Then apply the healing brush, etc. Do not crop. Do not apply post-crop vignetting.
  2. Export all of the images to PS, as layers.
  3. In PS align them and let PS figure out how big the image needs to be. Do your PS work, such as color blending, cloning, applying other plugins (to layers, right?), etc.
  4. Save and go back to LR.
[/i]Back in LR the only things you should be doing here (generally speaking) are:
  1. Cropping
  2. Post-crop vignette
  3. Re-adjust highlights/shadows as needed (use the 'j' key to turn on clipping indication).
[/i]Only in the very rare case will I take the result of this workflow back to PS. Fortunately, by using the above setting, I don't lose any data. Ever. And I only ever resize an image on export. There's no reason to do anything but.

When I started out, I tried bouncing back and forth because I didn't really understand the rendering of the intervening images, and it just caused me trouble. I think this approach results in far fewer headaches. At least, fewer headaches for me.

I'd love to demonstrate with a couple of your to-be-stitched images. I'm willing to bet what you want to do is possible.


Photo Comments
,

817.3K

241K

  • Facebook

    817,251 / Likes

  • Twitter

    241,000 / Followers

  • Google+

    1,620,816 / Followers

Latest Reviews

The Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II is Sony’s flagship mirrorless zoom lens. As such, it’s loaded with features and has a top-shelf build quality that makes it a top pick!

Mar 27, 2024

The Leica SL2-S is an attractive, premium mirrorless camera with photo and video specs that are sure to impress. And with the legendary Leica name, you know this camera exudes quality!

Mar 26, 2024

The Sigma fp L is a compact full-frame camera with a 61-megapixel sensor, 4K video capabilities, in-body image stabilization, and weather-sealed construction. What’s not to like?!

Mar 19, 2024

The Canon 1DX Mark III is a big, burly professional camera packed with top-end features. Is it worth the investment in 2024? Find out in this detailed review!

Mar 04, 2024
Get 600+ Pro photo lessons for $1

Forum Top Posters

Latest Articles

Smartphone photos have come a long way in recent years. With their increase in quality comes the ability to create large prints. Learn why canvas is a great option for your phone photos!

Mar 29, 2024

The Sony FE 70-200mm f/2.8 GM OSS II is Sony’s flagship mirrorless zoom lens. As such, it’s loaded with features and has a top-shelf build quality that makes it a top pick!

Mar 27, 2024

Time management is a critical skill to master when you’re a photographer. But how do you get the most out of the limited time you have? Check out this guide to learn a few tricks!

Mar 27, 2024

The Leica SL2-S is an attractive, premium mirrorless camera with photo and video specs that are sure to impress. And with the legendary Leica name, you know this camera exudes quality!

Mar 26, 2024

Opening a photography business means undertaking various photography marketing strategies to promote your work. But you don’t want to do the same old thing - try these unique ideas!

Mar 22, 2024

The Canon EOS 80D might be a few years old, but it’s nevertheless a quality camera to invest in as a beginner or enthusiast looking for a mid-range DSLR with tons of lens options.

Mar 22, 2024

Wedding consultations are a critical part of a wedding photography gig. It’s when you learn about the couple and their wants, and present them with how you will meet those desires.

Mar 22, 2024

If you're looking for the best metal print of 2023, you'll find it from Artbeat Studios. After months of testing, Artbeat Studios beat out the competition!

Mar 21, 2024