Why are My Files So Big?

[KED]

In-camera, my images are in the 11MB size range. Once they are imported into LR, the metadata shows them to be more than double that. Why would that be? That's a lot of disk space for one image! Thanks in advance.

 

[Victoria Bampton]

Hi Kent

Are you importing as raw files? Or DNG's? Which camera?

If you right click on a file and show in Finder, how big is the file ACTUALLY on disc?

And where are you looking at the metadata?

 

[KED]

Hi Kent

Are you importing as raw files? Or DNG's? Which camera?

If you right click on a file and show in Finder, how big is the file ACTUALLY on disc?

And where are you looking at the metadata?

They're DNGs from RAW images, EOS 1DMkIII. The file (one that I checked) is actually 23MB per finder, exactly as per the metadata in the right hand panel of the Library module. I don't have that particular image in the camera anymore, but am generally sure that RAW images run about 1' - 11 MB in this camera.

 

[Brad Snyder]

Kent, are you electing to embed the RAW in the DNG? While that maximizes future compatiblity and flexibiliy, it will almost double the file size.

Library > Edit >Preferences > Import tab - what is the status of the 'Embed Original Raw File' check box?

 

[KED]

Kent, are you electing to embed the RAW in the DNG? While that maximizes future compatiblity and flexibiliy, it will almost double the file size.

Just checked; that's it. Do most people NOT do that? This is not archival-quality photography we are talking about here, and once I'm finished editing and have posted my shots, I am almost always finished for good.

 

[Brad Snyder]

That's one of those religious wars right now. Mfgr's proprietary RAW formats versus Adobe's open DNG format. Who do you trust x years hence? There are arguments for and against both sides.

Given you're situation, I think you're safe not embedding the RAW file. The information is still in there for retrieval, it's just in a format that will need a DNG capable application to deal with it. If you've already backed up the RAWs, it's largely moot. If you're not going to need to re-edit for a magazine cover or some other re-purpose, it's again, largely moot.

While we're on the topic, the other choice in that dialog Box
Preserve Raw or Linearize, also affects how the data is stored. Preserve Raw maximizes the data reserved from the raw mosaic. Linearize apparently allows a little bit broader compatability among DNG aware applications. I personally choose Preserve Raw, but only because I'm not sure why I'd need the Linearize choice.

 

[KED]

That's one of those religious wars right now. Mfgr's proprietary RAW formats versus Adobe's open DNG format. Who do you trust x years hence? There are arguments for and against both sides.

Given you're situation, I think you're safe not embedding the RAW file. The information is still in there for retrieval, it's just in a format that will need a DNG capable application to deal with it. If you've already backed up the RAWs, it's largely moot. If you're not going to need to re-edit for a magazine cover or some other re-purpose, it's again, largely moot.

While we're on the topic, the other choice in that dialog Box
Preserve Raw or Linearize, also affects how the data is stored. Preserve Raw maximizes the data reserved from the raw mosaic. Linearize apparently allows a little bit broader compatability among DNG aware applications. I personally choose Preserve Raw, but only because I'm not sure why I'd need the Linearize choice.

Thanks Brad; everything you say makes sense; now we'll see whether logic can triumph over paranoia.

One last question: is there a way to go back into previously imported images an un-embed the RAW data?

 

[Brad Snyder]

One last question: is there a way to go back into previously imported images an un-embed the RAW data?

By this, I'm assuming you mean, can you just strip out the RAW archive chunk from the existing DNG, in order to decrease the file size?

Don't know, maybe someone else does.

Let me suggest an experiment. I haven't verified this. Work with file copies, and not your originals.

In the operating system (Finder, I guess on Mac) make a spare copy of one of the DNGs embedded with the RAW archive. Put it in a new test directory.
In LR create a new test catalog. Try importing the old DNG with the "embed RAW" preference setting turned off.

If that does it, then still sticking with copies and not originals, you can work your way thru the rest of your collection. Then import/export catalogs until everything's converted.

Just a thought. Might be easier to just live with the past files, and make the adjustment going forward. Hard-drives get cheaper every day.

 

[KED]

By this, I'm assuming you mean, can you just strip out the RAW archive chunk from the existing DNG, in order to decrease the file size?

Just a thought. Might be easier to just live with the past files, and make the adjustment going forward. Hard-drives get cheaper every day.

Yes, I was thinking about recapturing those MB to be put to better use on my hard drive, but I'm nowhere near capacity, so now that you have helped me identify what's going on, I'm in good shape.

Thanks!

 

[Brad Snyder]

.............