Why does a stitched panorama TIFF become much larger than the original JPEGs?

Asked 6/11/2019

3 views

2 answers

0

I merged five 5 MB JPEGs into a panorama from Lightroom using Photoshop. When I save the panorama as a TIFF, it becomes about 650 MB. If I flatten the layers and save again, it drops to about 111 MB.

Why is the TIFF so much larger? Is Photoshop creating extra image data during the panorama merge? I expected the final file to be closer to the combined size of the original JPEGs. What's the best way to save the panorama without losing quality but also without such a huge file size?

Originally by Photography Stack Exchange contributor. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

Photography Stack Exchange contributor

7y ago

2 Answers

4

Why does this happen? Is photoshop creating new information? ... The max size should be no more than 5 * 5 = 25Mb, right?

Your source images are JPG, so it doesn't make sense to compare their sizes with a final uncompressed TIF. (Apples to Oranges.) You will get a more reasonable output size for comparison if you resave your TIF output as JPG. (Apples to Apples.)

Then, when I flatten layers and save again, it reduces to 111 MB [from 650 MB].

Each layer contains pixels that were not present in the original to expand the image to fit parts of the panorama that the other photos cover. These pixels require space to store. Each layer also contains alpha channels to define transparent areas. Since you are using an uncompressed format, this "extra" information takes up a lot of space. Flattening the image discards "duplicate" pixels that aren't visible, as well as the alpha channels.

How can I save it in a format that doesn't lose any pixels, but also doesn't increase in size?

You usually cannot get photos down to the size of JPGs without resorting to lossy compression. You can try PNG, which doesn't support layers and is slower, but usually smaller than TIF. You can also save TIF with lossless compression – the best at this time is Deflate (Zip).

I would use the native format of the software (PSD for Photoshop, XCF for GIMP) while actively working on the image. Then save the final work with JPG quality 99 (Photoshop 12).

My experience has been that the difference between quality 99-100 and lossless is negligible. Plus you have the original source images if it becomes necessary to reprocess. While you would likely want to avoid duplicating work in the future, advances in technology should make future efforts quicker with improved results.

Originally by user75526. Source · Licensed CC BY-SA 4.0

user75526

7y ago

0

AI Answer

Generated from our catalog & community — verify before relying on it.

This is normal. The main reason is that you’re comparing compressed JPEGs to a TIFF, which is often much less compressed or uncompressed.

A panorama saved from Photoshop usually contains multiple layers. Each layer is expanded to the full canvas size, including transparent/empty areas, and Photoshop also stores masks/alpha information for blending. All of that adds a lot of data. When you flatten the image, those extra layers and transparency data are removed, so the file gets much smaller.

Photoshop isn’t inventing meaningful image detail, but it is storing additional pixel, layer, and transparency information needed to build the panorama.

Also, file size does not scale simply from 5 × 5 MB = 25 MB, because JPEG size depends on compression, not just pixel count.

If you want lossless quality with a smaller file, save the TIFF with lossless compression such as LZW. If you want the smallest file and can accept lossy compression, save a JPEG copy. For editing, a layered TIFF/PSD will always be much larger than the original JPEGs.

UniqueBot

AI

7y ago

Your Answer