File Format: Layered TIFF versus PSD

BF
Posted By
Brad_Funkhouser
Aug 7, 2004
Views
457
Replies
7
Status
Closed
Saving my image files as layered TIFFs with ZIP layer compression results in files that are generally between a third to half the size of the same image saved as a PSD file. As far as I can tell from my testing, bringing the layered TIFFs back into Photoshop retains all of my Photoshop details: layers, channels, layer masks, etc. etc. Other than taking longer to save, am I losing anything by saving as layered TIFFs versus PSD files?? If so, I can’t see it.

Why isn’t there a Photoshop compression option when saving PSD files that would result in the same types of file size reductions I get when saving the layered TIFFs? I’d really rather save my working files as PSD files so that I can easily distinguish them from flattened TIFF copies which I must produce for sending to my ImagePrint RIP, but I’m generally working with 400 to 800 Meg PSD files, so the disk space savings I get by using layered/compressed TIFFs is significant. But I’d feel more comfortable if the PSD format would provide the same size reduction capability.

Am I missing something here?

Thanks.

– Brad
Related Tags
file format layer tiff vs

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

MM
Mac_McDougald
Aug 7, 2004
Am I missing something here?

Not really.
PSD has some degree of built-in proprietary compression, but is nowhere near what the LZW or ZIP TIFF algorithms can achieve.

The tradoff is that compressed TIFF opens more slowly than non-compressed (or PSD), but with a fast machine, is probably not much of a factor.

Also, btw, LZW is more "universal" a format than ZIP for TIFFs. Also also, lots of apps don’t support layered TIFF in the first place.

Mac
BF
Brad_Funkhouser
Aug 7, 2004
I use LZW as the "Image" compression for TIFFs, but the "Layer Compression" has only choices of RLE or ZIP, and ZIP makes smaller files. When interfacing with other Apps, I always produce flattened LZW compressed TIFFs. I’m considering the Layered TIFFs only for files that will be used exclusively by Photoshop. But I want to make sure I’m not shooting myself in the foot in terms of future versions of Photoshop being able to read these layered TIFF files. Are layered TIFFs REALLY safe now, and going forward??

I wish I didn’t even have to consider the use of layered TIFFs… why can’t Adobe put adequate compression options into PSD so I can stay with their native file format? This is frustrating. I sometimes wonder if Adobe is secretly owned by a consortium of hard drive manufacturers? 🙂

– Brad
Y
YrbkMgr
Aug 7, 2004
Brad,

Adobe "owns" the TIFF specification (for lack of a better description). Not all software developers care to implement all of the specs and therefore only recognize partial specs. This is the problem with Tiffs in general – lack of adherence to the spec.

I wouldn’t think you were shooting yourself in the foot by using them, provided you intend to keep Photoshop as a part of your image editing arsenal well into the future, since Adobe will (IMHO) always support the specs over which they have guardianship.

Personally however, I always save to PSD for my own use, and burn them off to CD when I need to.

Peace,
Tony
ND
Nick_Decker
Aug 7, 2004
why can’t Adobe put adequate compression options into PSD so I can stay with their native file format?

This is just a guess, but maybe it has to do with backward compatibility of PSD files. Earlier versions of PS wouldn’t be able to open them.
RH
r_harvey
Aug 7, 2004
…Not all software developers care to implement all of the specs and therefore only recognize partial specs. This is the problem with Tiffs in general – lack of adherence to the spec.

I think it’s often that they see that it’s so vast, that they just support the minimum required for their product, on just the platform for which their product runs. This isn’t a criticism–it’s a big deal to add all of those features, and if you don’t want to bloat your product with features you’ll not use, even if there are free libraries, why bother? (Okay, I can see reasons to bother… but that can be the reasoning used by some developers.)
Y
YrbkMgr
Aug 7, 2004
I think it’s often that they see that it’s so vast, that they just support the minimum required for their product, on just the platform for which their product runs.

<nodding> Yep – and it creates complexities. How do you handle a multi-layered tiff in MS-Word? Does it matter that all the tiff specs are handled, except that *some* images won’t be compatible… and on and on…
CC
Chris_Cox
Aug 9, 2004
Yes, backward and third party compatibility are what prevents us from improving the compression in PSD.

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections