Photoshop CS4 wont open my .psb panorama from Autopano Giga 2.51  

Share your tips and tricks here or get help with any Autopano Pro / Giga problem!
No bug reports (of any kind) in this forum!
no avatar
Asher Kelman
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 69
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:00 am
Info

Photoshop CS4 wont open my .psb panorama from Autopano Giga 2.51

by Asher Kelman » Wed Apr 13, 2011 9:59 am

I rendered with Spline 36 and also spline 64, Exposure Fusion, panorama, embed all outputs checked. For some unknown reason the layers option is grayed out and inactive. So instead I checked pictures and that in the past has given me layers.


CS4 wont open the stitched file! It could be that it's down in memory while Auto Pano Giga is working. Or it could be something else. CS4 is supposed to be able to handle terrabyte files in .psb form but Photoshop wont open it!

"Could not complete your request because this file is not compatible with this version of Photoshop"

13.59 GB is too much perhaps!

But only have 52883 x 25093 pixels at 16 BIT and that should be O.K.

Any ideas?

Thanks,

Asher
Journeys to the Masterpiece

"The Intimate Artistic Photography Forum"

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:41 am

Asher Kelman wrote:13.59 GB is too much perhaps!

Hi Asher!

Is there an alpha channel in the rendered image? I suggest to use 8 bit-TIFFs instead of 16 - they´re smaller in data and you rarely need 16bit really. When there´s an alpha channel it pumps up data also.
What´s your hardware? Aren´t you using Mac? Do you run 64bit-OS?

Hope you´re feeling well these days!?

best to you, Klaus
Last edited by klausesser on Wed Apr 13, 2011 10:43 am, edited 1 time in total.
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
Asher Kelman
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 69
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:00 am
Info

by Asher Kelman » Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:39 am

klausesser wrote:
Asher Kelman wrote:13.59 GB is too much perhaps!

Hi Asher!

Is there an alpha channel in the rendered image? I suggest to use 8 bit-TIFFs instead of 16 - they´re smaller in data and you rarely need 16bit really. When there´s an alpha channel it pumps up data also.
What´s your hardware? Aren´t you using Mac? Do you run 64bit-OS?

Hope you´re feeling well these days!?

best to you, Klaus

Hi Klaus,

Thank goodness I'm well and a happy guy! I seem to remember you built a super Windows system a short while back! I'm don't think that CS4 ever gets into a 64 BIT mode in the Mac OS right now, however in CS5 it is supposed to work. Nacs seem to be a bit behind in the super graphics world of Pano and HDR processing. SNS-HDR is a windows program.

Theres' no alpha channel I know if! One shouldn't be forced to go to 8 BIT!

What I'll do is upgrade to CS5 and see if the files open!

Pop by and visit. would love you to show off your panos! Any idea on the graying out of the Layers option for the rendering panel?

Asher
Journeys to the Masterpiece

"The Intimate Artistic Photography Forum"

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Wed Apr 13, 2011 1:36 pm

Asher Kelman wrote:Thank goodness I'm well and a happy guy!

Fine! Good to hear.

Asher Kelman wrote:I seem to remember you built a super Windows system a short while back! I'm don't think that CS4 ever gets into a 64 BIT mode in the Mac OS right now, however in CS5 it is supposed to work. Nacs seem to be a bit behind in the super graphics world of Pano and HDR processing. SNS-HDR is a windows program.

I`m using a MacPro and a MacBook Pro. Heard about issues using big files in CS4 - never used it . . i "jumped" from CS3 to CS5.
But i have Win7 running on both machines in a VM. Used it for configuring my handheld-controller once and never touched it again . . :cool:

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
Asher Kelman
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 69
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:00 am
Info

by Asher Kelman » Fri Apr 15, 2011 10:26 pm

Here's an update.

One can render the file as 8 BIT .psb with layers and it will be made. What one gets is a ballooning of size to laughable levels. So a file of 400 GB appears, I just deleted it! I repeated the process and ended up with a 266.4 GB file! It took a good 30-40 minutes to open and then to my surprise its actually only 3.73 GB/4.02 GB max size! Just one pano layers and 243 picture layers from Canon 5D2 24 MP (RAW files fed to APG).

I saved the file as a copy and it's now only was ~ 27.8 GB!! Explain that. What kind of output to PSB is APG making for us? Why is it grabbing extra space?

I can understand that if the 8 BIT file is being bloated somehow to 8.5 times it's size, then it's no wonder that 16 BIT files wont open at all!

Asher
Last edited by Asher Kelman on Fri Apr 15, 2011 10:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Journeys to the Masterpiece

"The Intimate Artistic Photography Forum"

User avatar
AlexandreJ
Kolor Team
 
Posts: 5987
Likes: 7 posts
Liked in: 10 posts
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2005 4:56 pm
Location: Francin, France
Info

by AlexandreJ » Mon Apr 18, 2011 12:00 pm

Issue 670 opened.
Good report.

no avatar
Asher Kelman
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 69
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:00 am
Info

by Asher Kelman » Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:01 pm

AlexandreJ wrote:Issue 670 opened.
Good report.

Alexandre,

Je vous remerci mille fois!

I'm so grateful to have attention on this problem. I'm trying to print at 2.5 x 6 meters at 300 dpi. Meanwhile, I'll install CS5 so that I have more RAM available and use my 120 GB SSD as scratch.

If you need the files, let me know!

Amitiées,

Asher
Journeys to the Masterpiece

"The Intimate Artistic Photography Forum"

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Mon Apr 18, 2011 6:20 pm

Asher Kelman wrote:
AlexandreJ wrote:Issue 670 opened.
Good report.

Alexandre,

Je vous remerci mille fois!

I'm so grateful to have attention on this problem. I'm trying to print at 2.5 x 6 meters at 300 dpi. Meanwhile, I'll install CS5 so that I have more RAM available and use my 120 GB SSD as scratch.

If you need the files, let me know!

Amitiées,

Asher

Hi Asher!

Are you "doing the Gursky"? :cool: Nobody prints such a big image using 300dpi image-resolution! gursky´s or Struth´s prints usualy are done with Lambda or Lightjets. The machine-resolution is 300 or 400 dpi - but that doesn´t mean you need 300 or 400dpi as image-resolution!

Such big prints usually are done in very best quality using 100 to 150dpi image res. In average quality they use around 75 dpi for these sizes.

I had a print of 22m width done with 50dpi - that was extremly fine.

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
Asher Kelman
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 69
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:00 am
Info

by Asher Kelman » Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:58 pm

klausesser wrote:
Asher Kelman wrote:
AlexandreJ wrote:Issue 670 opened.
Good report.

Alexandre,

Je vous remerci mille fois!

I'm so grateful to have attention on this problem. I'm trying to print at 2.5 x 6 meters at 300 dpi. Meanwhile, I'll install CS5 so that I have more RAM available and use my 120 GB SSD as scratch.

If you need the files, let me know!

Amitiées,

Asher

Hi Asher!

Are you "doing the Gursky"? :cool: Nobody prints such a big image using 300dpi image-resolution! gursky´s or Struth´s prints usualy are done with Lambda or Lightjets. The machine-resolution is 300 or 400 dpi - but that doesn´t mean you need 300 or 400dpi as image-resolution!

Such big prints usually are done in very best quality using 100 to 150dpi image res. In average quality they use around 75 dpi for these sizes.

I had a print of 22m width done with 50dpi - that was extremly fine.

best, Klaus

Klaus,

For billboards for sure you are totally correct!

In this work, one will view people in the picture from 10 meters up to to 25cm!

That's the detail I want. I'd love to see just a head printed from 50 dpi, 100 dpi and 300 dpi file on the same paper!

Asher
Last edited by Asher Kelman on Mon Apr 18, 2011 7:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Journeys to the Masterpiece

"The Intimate Artistic Photography Forum"

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:30 pm

Asher Kelman wrote:That's the detail I want. I'd love to see just a head printed from 50 dpi, 100 dpi and 300 dpi file on the same paper!

Depends on the viewing distance - a big picture like yours i guess is viewed at about 1,50/2m and more. Viewed at 2m you wouldn´t see any difference between 150 and 300ppi image-resolution but you will notice most likely a difference in print-resolution. A 300dpi-print will show subtle tones smoother. Therefore Lambda or Lightjet prints are preferred among artist-photographers.

If you want to view at shorter distances you should rise the print-resolution. Small pictures need to be of a higher print-resolution than big pictures.

There are two relevant points: the "resolution" (ppi/pixel per inch) of the image and the "resolution" (dpi/dots per inch) resp. the "density" (in dots) the printer uses to spray or "print" the color onto the paper.

best, Klaus
Last edited by klausesser on Mon Apr 18, 2011 9:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel

no avatar
hankkarl
Member
 
Posts: 1284
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Tue Feb 21, 2006 5:32 pm
Location: Connecticut, USA
Info

by hankkarl » Wed Apr 20, 2011 3:40 am

Perhaps some of the "old rules" are going away. I can imagine a pano printed and put on a wall where people would walk up and examine the detail.

no avatar
Asher Kelman
Member
 
Topic author
Posts: 69
Likes: 0 post
Liked in: 0 post
Joined: Mon Jul 19, 2010 5:00 am
Info

by Asher Kelman » Wed Apr 20, 2011 6:17 am

hankkarl wrote:Perhaps some of the "old rules" are going away. I can imagine a pano printed and put on a wall where people would walk up and examine the detail.

Exactly! :)

Asher
Journeys to the Masterpiece

"The Intimate Artistic Photography Forum"

User avatar
klausesser
Member
 
Posts: 8836
Likes: 5 posts
Liked in: 64 posts
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 12:18 am
Location: Duesseldorf, Germany
Info

by klausesser » Wed Apr 20, 2011 11:11 am

Asher Kelman wrote:
hankkarl wrote:Perhaps some of the "old rules" are going away. I can imagine a pano printed and put on a wall where people would walk up and examine the detail.

Exactly! :)

Asher

If you like do your big-size thing with 300dpi . . . Good luck - you´ll need it :rolleyes::cool:

best, Klaus
Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance. Coco Chanel


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron