Process image to a defined file size?
I can't see a way to process images to a defined or maximum file size. It would help where a forum imposes a file size limit on photo uploads. Is it possible? I'm using Windows.
0
-
Not that I'm aware of. There is the file size preview in the process summary but it is not precise. 0 -
Yes, it seems extremely imprecise unfortunately. 0 -
I now open the file I need to resize in Affinity Photo and resize it there. Whilst still not super-accurate it is usually good enough and better than C1P 0 -
Brian,
Surely file size limits (in kb/Mb) are just limits not targets?
Most image sites for image will specify a dimension limitation rather than file size although in theory I guess that the dimensions also strongly influence the file size even taking compression or lack of it into account.
Why does file size matter so much in your use case? What am I missing here that I need to know about?
It must surely be possible to readily experiment with compression (Quality) to obtain an optimum file size for the images dimensions you have chosen and thus obtain a ball park range of quality setting values.
If, at that point, I felt there was some value in completely optimising the quality/file size balance it would not be that difficult to run a few output processes using different values and then pick the one that suit me best. In fact a few process recipes in a batch would allow that to happen with a single click and then be able to check the sizes directly rather than rely on some sort of estimate.
Quite how resizing in another application helps the overall process and image quality is not obvious to me at the moment so I would love to understand more.
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
Why does file size matter so much in your use case?
Hi Grant,
It's just for images posted to the Pluspora/Diaspora* social media platform. They have an absolute limit of 4.2MB.0 -
rafikiphoto wrote:
SFA wrote:
Why does file size matter so much in your use case?
Hi Grant,
It's just for images posted to the Pluspora/Diaspora* social media platform. They have an absolute limit of 4.2MB.
Hi Brian,
So you seek to always load the largest file you can possibly load? JPG? If so that, typically, would be quite a large file in terms of dimensions. (Unless for some reason it held a lot of detail that would reduce the compression options.)
Or are you starting out with some especially large files?
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
Why does file size matter so much in your use case? What am I missing here that I need to know about?
Just as a heads up, Lightroom has a export feature which limits the file size to the setting you choose. In my case file size matters because my website provider recommends not to exceed an image size of 600kb so the site loads quickly, it will accept larger image file sizes but gives a warning also. Anyway it is quite convenient to set the file size limit to 600kb and know that LR will set compression to the highest setting that does not exceed 600kb.0 -
cdc wrote:
SFA wrote:
Why does file size matter so much in your use case? What am I missing here that I need to know about?
Just as a heads up, Lightroom has a export feature which limits the file size to the setting you choose. In my case file size matters because my website provider recommends not to exceed an image size of 600kb so the site loads quickly, it will accept larger image file sizes but gives a warning also. Anyway it is quite convenient to set the file size limit to 600kb and know that LR will set compression to the highest setting that does not exceed 600kb.
I understand that but what steps do you then take to check that the image quality is at a level that you are comfortable with?
Can you set that parameter and see the results on screen via proofing?
I appreciate that in many cases this sort of question is probably not critical to that part of your process workflow.
At a 4+ Mb max size I would have thought there was plenty of latitude for a quality image in most cases even if the output was some way below the max size allowed.
At 600kb things are likely to be a bit more critical I would imagine. And yes load speed and bandwidth in general were some of the issues I had a the back of my mind - especially for the "world wide" aspect of web use.
Grant0 -
SFA wrote:
cdc wrote:
SFA wrote:
I understand that but what steps do you then take to check that the image quality is at a level that you are comfortable with?
Can you set that parameter and see the results on screen via proofing?
Proofing, no, I just look at the jpg images after they've been processed out and if anything looks off I'll go back and reprocess it. That's pretty rare, I think I've only had to that a couple times.0
La publicación no admite más comentarios.
Comentarios
9 comentarios