PSD or TIFF for working with lightroom & photoshop?

PSD or TIFF for working with lightroom & photoshop?


  • Total voters
    13
PSD is derived from TIFF and offers lower file sizes, but is still loseless. TIFF probably has higher compatibility with non-Adobe software but that is the only advantage of it.
 
I've never even thought about it, I use tiff simply as that is what LR is currently set to do. Time for a play I think ...
 
I've recently sent some pictures out for printing and framing, and the guy doing it asked for images in TIFF format. I've retained them on my system in PSD to retain the layers in case I want to do some more editing later. I don't if that's the right thing to do or not, so this is an interesting read.
 
I've recently sent some pictures out for printing and framing, and the guy doing it asked for images in TIFF format. I've retained them on my system in PSD to retain the layers in case I want to do some more editing later. I don't if that's the right thing to do or not, so this is an interesting read.
TIFF supports layers too. But they are huge files, if you have many layers they can get really huge too! PSD may make more sense as I'm sure there will be no loss of quality.
 
PSD's - seems to make sense to me, as I use them to tell me a file has been edited in photoshop. Lightroom keeps track of them anbd I produce the final mage in jpeg from lghtroom.
 
PSD makes the most sense to me if re-editing may ever be required. Being smaller does no harm either.
 
PSDs for me too, tiffs are too big, especially with Sony files☹️
 
I've always saved uncompressed tiffs from Photoshop but wonder whether I'm missing a trick? Might psd files be faster or more space efficient? I know I'd need to check the 'maximize compatibility' option to make Lightroom happy.
I've always preferred using PSDs having started by converting the CR2 file to DNG. I love it that all editing is non destructive as long as it is done using layers, as I've many times come back to favorite images, as my knowledge has increased, and re-edited a completely new and improved version. I've never tried any of this with TIFs but in any case I feel safer sticking with the Adobe tools throughout.
 
I've always preferred using PSDs having started by converting the CR2 file to DNG. I love it that all editing is non destructive as long as it is done using layers, as I've many times come back to favorite images, as my knowledge has increased, and re-edited a completely new and improved version. I've never tried any of this with TIFs but in any case I feel safer sticking with the Adobe tools throughout.

Tiffs are an Adobe file format. It was invented by Aldus who were then taken over by Adobe who then updated the Tiff File format. It is the basis of most Raw formats as well as PSDs and DNG.
So it has a long history.

Aldus also invented Pagemaker Now also Adobe and the the forerunner of InDesign
 
Last edited:
Tiffs are an Adobe file format. It was invented by Aldus who were then taken over by Adobe who then updated the Tiff File format. It is the basis of most Raw formats as well as PSDs and DNG.
So it has a long history.

Aldus also invented Pagemaker Now also Adobe and the the forerunner of InDesign
Thanks, I didn't know that history. But does that mean that TIFFs are just as convenient as PSDs are?
 
Thanks, I didn't know that history. But does that mean that TIFFs are just as convenient as PSDs are?
The same image in photoshop saved as tiif and psd will have significantly different file size with psd generally being much smaller. The more layers there are the bigger the difference seems to be. For example I have one image with around 30 layers, as a tiff it is obver 2Gb as a psd it is around 650Mb.
 
Thanks, I didn't know that history. But does that mean that TIFFs are just as convenient as PSDs are?
If you are saving an original raw in lightroom all your work in progress is saved in the lightroom index and applied when you re open the file.
It does this what ever the file type is.
When it comes to photoshop all your changes are made and saved at pixel level, and layers can be saved in psd or tiff. But the history is not saved so you can not go back later to an earlier state.
So in lightroom you may as well save as a raw file. As you can always get back to the starting point.
However in photoshop either pds or tiff are as good as each other.
I tend to save as a tiff ( no Layers) as sizes is not that important to me.
Though it is probably best to Keep the original raw in lightroom and add any photoshopped versions with it.
 
Personally I always shoot RAW and save the processed file as a jpeg, usually up to about 3MB (hope I haven't misunderstood the OP's original post). Naturally I save the RAW files (they're the 'negatives', after all). The only time I use TIFFs is if I've scanned an old photograph and want to work on it over a period of days or weeks, eventually saving the finished image as a jpeg. I usually retain the original TIFF file, plus one or two of the most recent TIFFs relating to that image, depending on whether I may want to revisit an adjustment.

If I've used any perspective adjustment in PSE then, when I come to save it, the default option comes up as PSD, but I always select the jpeg option at that point because by then I'm usually done.
 
Back
Top