User Tag List

Thanks useful information Thanks useful information:  6
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Is this normal?

  1. #1
    Member formerly known as : Lplates Glenda's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Sep 2011
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    17,387
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Is this normal?

    Using Photoshop CC, I was resizing an image for posting and found it says the size of quality 6 is larger than quality 7. I tested on a few other images and had the same result.

    Screen Shot 2019-10-05 at 8.37.20 am.png

    Screen Shot 2019-10-05 at 8.37.35 am.png
    Glenda



  2. #2
    Arch-Σigmoid Ausphotography Regular ameerat42's Avatar
    Join Date
    18 Sep 2009
    Location
    Nthn Sydney
    Posts
    23,519
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It sure seems odd! I'd suggest saving a version at each setting and then
    checking with File Manager.

    - - - Updated - - -

    ---Having achieved the status of a dead cat, I got these results, too
    NOTE that the differences in respective file sizes between Photoshop and File Manager
    is due to how much actual disk space (because of unfilled parts of disk sector) each
    file takes up. So the actual 151.6 KB of file size (scrawled over with the red line )
    takes up 168 KB of sectors, etc.

    But that doesn't explain "why" for the unexpected result...
    DSC_3993aclrsave--test.jpg
    CC, Image editing OK.

  3. #3
    Member formerly known as : Lplates
    Threadstarter
    Glenda's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Sep 2011
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    17,387
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Certainly seems strange when going from 10 > 9 > 8 etc reduces the size each step.

  4. #4
    Perpetually Bewildered
    Join Date
    13 Sep 2009
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,244
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I've noticed this in the past as well. It never bothered me - I've assumed there is some change in the compression algorithm that results in this 'quirk'. (Perhaps at higher quality the algorithm is a little 'harder' to keep file sizes down? Quality 6 -> 7 is also the halfway point so that might have something to do with why the change happens here?)


    Cheers.
    Phil.

    Some Nikon stuff. I shoot Mirrorless and Mirrorlessless.


  5. #5
    I like my computer more than my camera farmmax's Avatar
    Join Date
    28 Mar 2010
    Location
    Central West
    Posts
    2,890
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My photoshop CS5.1 doesn't do that. It behaves normally, and 6 is smaller than 7. But, my format option is "Progressive". Do you want to try that instead of Baseline (Standard) and see if that gives the result you expect? It probably doesn't matter all that much

  6. #6
    Member formerly known as : Lplates
    Threadstarter
    Glenda's Avatar
    Join Date
    09 Sep 2011
    Location
    Gladstone
    Posts
    17,387
    Mentioned
    32 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Thanks fillum and farmmax.

    Fillum - it doesn't particularly worry me. I did have to go down to 5 to get under the 400k but the IQ seemed OK.

    Farmmax - I just tried changing this to progressive and the same thing happened although with progressive the file size was slightly higher.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •