Photoshop Gurus Forum
Welcome to Photoshop Gurus forum. Register a free account today to become a member! It's completely free. Once signed in, you'll enjoy an ad-free experience and be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
.psd v's .tif
- Thread starter Sark
- Start date
Hi Sark,
I was really curious about this question as I'd never given it a thought before. First I did a test of saving files as layered TIFFs and PSD formats. My test image had type, shapes, regular layers, channels, and work paths included. The TIFFs saved with Zip compression were slightly smaller than LZW and both were smaller than PSD files. All the same data seemed present in each of the three saved files. I couldn't see any reason not to save a layered TIFF based on my tests but couldn't help but still believe there was some hidden value to saving files in PSD format.
So I asked for expert advice and got lucky. Bruce Fraser replied, "TIFF can hold everything PSD can, and ZIP-compressed TIFFs are indeed smaller than PSDs.
The only downside is that not everything can read ZIP-compressed TIFFs. Examples include a page-layout app from Denver that I don't care about, and several RIPs that I do. I have hopes for the RIPs... "
The page layout app from Denver is, of course Quark. About that preview image business, if I remember properly you are using PS7, yes? Look in Photoshop preferences > File Handling and make sure Full Size is checked. That should provide the previews you seek, I believe.
I was really curious about this question as I'd never given it a thought before. First I did a test of saving files as layered TIFFs and PSD formats. My test image had type, shapes, regular layers, channels, and work paths included. The TIFFs saved with Zip compression were slightly smaller than LZW and both were smaller than PSD files. All the same data seemed present in each of the three saved files. I couldn't see any reason not to save a layered TIFF based on my tests but couldn't help but still believe there was some hidden value to saving files in PSD format.
So I asked for expert advice and got lucky. Bruce Fraser replied, "TIFF can hold everything PSD can, and ZIP-compressed TIFFs are indeed smaller than PSDs.
The only downside is that not everything can read ZIP-compressed TIFFs. Examples include a page-layout app from Denver that I don't care about, and several RIPs that I do. I have hopes for the RIPs... "
The page layout app from Denver is, of course Quark. About that preview image business, if I remember properly you are using PS7, yes? Look in Photoshop preferences > File Handling and make sure Full Size is checked. That should provide the previews you seek, I believe.
Sark! Your apparently simple question will end up altering the way I use Photoshop in the future! 
Further thoughts from Bruce Fraser on the issue of TIFF vs Photoshop.
" It's partly that TIFF does everything PSD does with a smaller file, but...
I grew up in the school where PSD was Photoshop's private format. Marketing idiots decided that it would be a good idea to allow people to put PSDs in other applications, giving rise to the myth that those other applications understood PSD (most of them don't?they just read the flattened composite, which is what all the Maximize Compatibility nonsense is about).
As a result, the Photoshop team basically lost control of the PSD format, so it's now the worst of two worlds?it's a proprietary, significantly undocumented format with none of the benefits of a proprietary, significantly undocumented format. (I doubt they'll make the same mistake with PSB.)
Aside from file size, the advantage of TIFF is that it's documented and widely-supported. Well-constructed TIFF readers should be able to ignore anything in the file that they don't understand and just read the flattened composite that every TIFF contains, so 100 years from now the file should still be readable (though I'm not really under the delusion that anyone will want to). So apart from the file size benefit, my use of TIFF is also a (very) small political statement. That's not a reason for anyone else to use it, but the openness and the smaller file sizes are."
My conclusion is that I'm going to stop using Photoshop's .psd file format and switch to layered TIFFs for my workflow. It's a very unexpected change but I've also just read that Chris Cox has hinted that .psd may go away altogether in the future.
Further thoughts from Bruce Fraser on the issue of TIFF vs Photoshop.
" It's partly that TIFF does everything PSD does with a smaller file, but...
I grew up in the school where PSD was Photoshop's private format. Marketing idiots decided that it would be a good idea to allow people to put PSDs in other applications, giving rise to the myth that those other applications understood PSD (most of them don't?they just read the flattened composite, which is what all the Maximize Compatibility nonsense is about).
As a result, the Photoshop team basically lost control of the PSD format, so it's now the worst of two worlds?it's a proprietary, significantly undocumented format with none of the benefits of a proprietary, significantly undocumented format. (I doubt they'll make the same mistake with PSB.)
Aside from file size, the advantage of TIFF is that it's documented and widely-supported. Well-constructed TIFF readers should be able to ignore anything in the file that they don't understand and just read the flattened composite that every TIFF contains, so 100 years from now the file should still be readable (though I'm not really under the delusion that anyone will want to). So apart from the file size benefit, my use of TIFF is also a (very) small political statement. That's not a reason for anyone else to use it, but the openness and the smaller file sizes are."
My conclusion is that I'm going to stop using Photoshop's .psd file format and switch to layered TIFFs for my workflow. It's a very unexpected change but I've also just read that Chris Cox has hinted that .psd may go away altogether in the future.
It's a bit ironic as the PSD format was, in its infancy, devised to shrink file size for fully layered composite images. As PS has progressed, more information has necessarily been added to the incorporation of PSD files. The lossless compression methods of TIF has become my format of choice. Another plus is its interoperability over platforms, and universal acceptance with other CG software.
Welles, your testing falls in line with what I inadvertantly discovered after the introduction of V7.
Beyond that, I don't know what it's like in your area, but TIF is preferred over PSD as a format for most of the printers in my (Montreal) area. There may be advantages for InDesign users, that I'd like to investigate.
Hey, I am always open to hear reasons why PSD is not a redundant format. So, please fill me in. B7
Anyway, it's an interesting question, that I plan on digging a little deeper into.
Welles, your testing falls in line with what I inadvertantly discovered after the introduction of V7.
Beyond that, I don't know what it's like in your area, but TIF is preferred over PSD as a format for most of the printers in my (Montreal) area. There may be advantages for InDesign users, that I'd like to investigate.
Hey, I am always open to hear reasons why PSD is not a redundant format. So, please fill me in. B7
Anyway, it's an interesting question, that I plan on digging a little deeper into.
More on the subject from several people....
I thought I would chime in here because (I think because of Bruce's advice.) I have been using ZIP compressed TIFFS in my work flow a lot since like 18 months.
There is one more thing to consider: Saving / opening time. PSD format (we are talking layered images) gives much faster saves/ slightly faster openings. Saving layered Zip compressed TIFF takes double the .PSD time.
So my work flow is as follows: While working on a project, I'll use .PSD format.
When finished with the job : (I'm with Bruce on NOT delivering layered files unless customer asks for it for some special reason.)
I would flatten, deliver UNCOMPRESSED.tif
Then I I'll resave layered file(s) just before Archiving to DVDs. I do it in batch for many files. Normally I would keep for my archive 2 files from every delivered project, both of them .tiffs.
I don't keep layered .psd s at all because of reasons Bruce mentioned
(size and future compabililty) I've done so in 18 months without problems so far .
The layered version - just before flattening my image ( zip compress )
and one flat ( uncompress )- delivered to customer also tiff. Normally they have the same name except I would give suffix _LDL before .tif extension?for Layered tiffs ( DL stands for "delivered to customer " and _FDL for Flattened delivered files . Obviously I save some layered versions Not delivered without that _LDL suffix.
I sort those files before archiving to DVDs in such a way that
_LDL.tif and _FDL.tif lands always on 2 different DVDs (that I burn 2 of each) just for that extra security .
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, Tiffs can be as large as 4GB.
Tif is a far more robust format over psd with other than Adobe applications.
Illustrator, on the other hand, offers greater support for psd format over tif. (I have not seen Illustrator CS2 yet to see if greater tif support has been included)
To answer the question, there is not a one and only format to use for all situations. Users need to decide which is best for them based upon their workflow.
I never deliver layered TIFFs because
a) it's an open invitation for the recipient to screw them up and
b) layers typically don't survive RGB>CMYK conversions well so my final docs are either native ID files containing flat CMYK TIFFs, or print-ready PDF.
But I often build the ID docs with layered RGB TIFFs, then flatten and convert as a final step before either submitting or burning a PDF. That way, I only have one file to track for each image through most of the workflow. I always archive my files as layered TIFF, and produce print-ready versions as needed.
Conceptually, sending out docs with layered TIFFs should work, but I'm still wrestling with "service providers" who like to turn off color management, and layered TIFFs would probably make their heads explode, so I generally try to submit things in as bulletproof a form as possible, (PDF/X-1a is pretty bullterproof!)
I thought I would chime in here because (I think because of Bruce's advice.) I have been using ZIP compressed TIFFS in my work flow a lot since like 18 months.
There is one more thing to consider: Saving / opening time. PSD format (we are talking layered images) gives much faster saves/ slightly faster openings. Saving layered Zip compressed TIFF takes double the .PSD time.
So my work flow is as follows: While working on a project, I'll use .PSD format.
When finished with the job : (I'm with Bruce on NOT delivering layered files unless customer asks for it for some special reason.)
I would flatten, deliver UNCOMPRESSED.tif
Then I I'll resave layered file(s) just before Archiving to DVDs. I do it in batch for many files. Normally I would keep for my archive 2 files from every delivered project, both of them .tiffs.
I don't keep layered .psd s at all because of reasons Bruce mentioned
(size and future compabililty) I've done so in 18 months without problems so far .
The layered version - just before flattening my image ( zip compress )
and one flat ( uncompress )- delivered to customer also tiff. Normally they have the same name except I would give suffix _LDL before .tif extension?for Layered tiffs ( DL stands for "delivered to customer " and _FDL for Flattened delivered files . Obviously I save some layered versions Not delivered without that _LDL suffix.
I sort those files before archiving to DVDs in such a way that
_LDL.tif and _FDL.tif lands always on 2 different DVDs (that I burn 2 of each) just for that extra security .
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, Tiffs can be as large as 4GB.
Tif is a far more robust format over psd with other than Adobe applications.
Illustrator, on the other hand, offers greater support for psd format over tif. (I have not seen Illustrator CS2 yet to see if greater tif support has been included)
To answer the question, there is not a one and only format to use for all situations. Users need to decide which is best for them based upon their workflow.
I never deliver layered TIFFs because
a) it's an open invitation for the recipient to screw them up and
b) layers typically don't survive RGB>CMYK conversions well so my final docs are either native ID files containing flat CMYK TIFFs, or print-ready PDF.
But I often build the ID docs with layered RGB TIFFs, then flatten and convert as a final step before either submitting or burning a PDF. That way, I only have one file to track for each image through most of the workflow. I always archive my files as layered TIFF, and produce print-ready versions as needed.
Conceptually, sending out docs with layered TIFFs should work, but I'm still wrestling with "service providers" who like to turn off color management, and layered TIFFs would probably make their heads explode, so I generally try to submit things in as bulletproof a form as possible, (PDF/X-1a is pretty bullterproof!)
http://partners.adobe.com/public/developer/en/tiff/TIFF6.pdf
Tiff comes from Aldus, which was bought by Adobe. Layered tiff was an Adobe invention and unreadable by most non-Adobe apps.
I personally prefer to use the proprietary tag (psd, c4d, ...when saving for myself. For print, I prefer (adobe)rgb pdf straight to preps where the color separation is done by the printers who know their presses better that I.
Tiff comes from Aldus, which was bought by Adobe. Layered tiff was an Adobe invention and unreadable by most non-Adobe apps.
I personally prefer to use the proprietary tag (psd, c4d, ...when saving for myself. For print, I prefer (adobe)rgb pdf straight to preps where the color separation is done by the printers who know their presses better that I.
WOW, what a response from what I thought was a simple question.
As a non pro, my workflow rarely leaves my own system. I'm using Win 2K and use the My Pictures image preview viewer. This works with all formats I use except .psd.
Having played around with a layered Tiff I was suprised that I could find nothing it didn't save from a photoshop file, so for me it seemed a simple choice of saving as a Tiff for stored images. I just expected there would be some major reason for not doing so, clearly this is not the case.
I'll try the Full size option under File handling , but I've a suspicion this only affects thumbnails, but I might be wrong.
Thanks for the replies. They certainly make interesting reading. Will be using Tiff from now on, as this certainly has a greater versitility for my needs.
Thanks again.
Sark
As a non pro, my workflow rarely leaves my own system. I'm using Win 2K and use the My Pictures image preview viewer. This works with all formats I use except .psd.
Having played around with a layered Tiff I was suprised that I could find nothing it didn't save from a photoshop file, so for me it seemed a simple choice of saving as a Tiff for stored images. I just expected there would be some major reason for not doing so, clearly this is not the case.
I'll try the Full size option under File handling , but I've a suspicion this only affects thumbnails, but I might be wrong.
Thanks for the replies. They certainly make interesting reading. Will be using Tiff from now on, as this certainly has a greater versitility for my needs.
Thanks again.
Sark
Welles.
It appears I do not have the Full size option in PS7's Preferences. The settings only affect thumbnails.
Will just save as Tiffs. File size is not a major issue for me, so uncompressed Tiffs with zip compressed layers are fine (compressed Tiffs don't preview). With only the layers compressed, files are still smaller than .psd's
My concern was whever I'd discover something missing at a later date from one of my files. The above posts and my own tests confirm that is not an issue.
Thanks again for posting.
Sark
It appears I do not have the Full size option in PS7's Preferences. The settings only affect thumbnails.
Will just save as Tiffs. File size is not a major issue for me, so uncompressed Tiffs with zip compressed layers are fine (compressed Tiffs don't preview). With only the layers compressed, files are still smaller than .psd's
My concern was whever I'd discover something missing at a later date from one of my files. The above posts and my own tests confirm that is not an issue.
Thanks again for posting.
Sark
)i use tiff files all the time... never save as psd's
as i make 90% of my stuff for print, no printers will take psd's .... (but love pdf's) but will take tiff files....
the main option is the compression data that you can use when saving......
and teh file size is slightly smaller...
plus also remember the 't' in tiff is for transerable...... so its can be opened in almost any graphics softwar... psd's are mainly for photoshop.
as i make 90% of my stuff for print, no printers will take psd's .... (but love pdf's) but will take tiff files....
the main option is the compression data that you can use when saving......
and teh file size is slightly smaller...
plus also remember the 't' in tiff is for transerable...... so its can be opened in almost any graphics softwar... psd's are mainly for photoshop.