Image Previews In Sierra Very Slow


Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
When I use the spacebar to view a TIFF image, it takes upwards of 5 seconds for it to appear.
(I am also getting the spinning wheel.)
With Mountain Lion, this view was immediate, whether it was a jpeg. or TIFF.
This makes it difficult to compare images at any quick rate of speed.
I know there are programs that can increase this speed, but they seem to be for RAW files only.
A tech once explained this was due to a change in the way the computer reads the files, and cannot be remedied.
Anyone know of a workaround?

(Sierra 10.12.6)
 
Ad

Advertisements

Cory Cooper

Moderator
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
8,904
Reaction score
342
Hello,

-Which model Mac?
-How much free space is left?
-Do you restart your Mac on a regular basis?
-How large are the TIFF files?

I am not sure what the tech meant, as Quick Look works pretty much instantly for all file types.

C
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
MacBook Pro (15-inch, Mid 2012.)
Running Sierra 10.12.6.
40 GB.
Yes.
Size varies - last one is 250MB.
 

Cory Cooper

Moderator
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
8,904
Reaction score
342
OK, thanks.

A 250 MB TIFF is a pretty large file, so there may be a slight delay. It may also depend on what the actual TIFF version/file type is, as there are several TIFF file types, compression schemes, etc.

Maybe test converting it to a PNG or JPEG and see if there is a Quick Look difference.

C
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Jpeg's are instant, TIFF is slow, PNG is somewhere between the two.
 

Cory Cooper

Moderator
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
8,904
Reaction score
342
OK

-What is the source of the large TIFFs?
-What are the file sizes of the JPG and PNG files?

Try some of these and see how they work in Quick Look: Sample images download

C
 
Ad

Advertisements

Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Those seem to open quickly, though the TIFF is only 10MB.
It's probably the large file size and the layers that are contained therein.
Still doesn't explain why the previous OS had no trouble with it.
The few days I had Mojave on my system, the files would literally take about 20-30 seconds to open.
This, and the fact Photoshop CS6 was not supported was my cause for rolling back to Sierra, as this was the only version that would still work with this older program and also with the latest Firefox version.
So it seems I have half the performance back, as the jpegs at least are quickly viewable.
 

Cory Cooper

Moderator
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
8,904
Reaction score
342
Hello,

Yes, a 250 MB TIFF with layers is quite a large file for Quick Look to handle. I am not sure why it would change with different versions of OS X.

When you rolled back to Sierra, did you do a full erase and install?

C
 

Cory Cooper

Moderator
Joined
May 19, 2004
Messages
8,904
Reaction score
342
OK, thanks.

I just pulled some old TIFF files of a backup drive. They are 85-100 MB each. They do take a couple of seconds with the spinning wheel to open in Quick Look.

This is the info for one of them:
Screen Shot 2020-07-19 at 11.24.06.png

I am using an iMac (21.5-inch, Late 2009) running macOS High Sierra 10.13.6 with a 512 GB SSD and 16 GB RAM.

I really think it is just the nature of the beast for large TIFF files.

C
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
I've done pretty extensive PS work, and a regular part of that work was comparing image files.
This definitely didn't happen with the original OS.
If I ever get back the the shop., I'll ask that tech what he was talking about (if he's still there!)
Thanks for the help anyway.
 
Ad

Advertisements

Joined
Apr 6, 2008
Messages
37
Reaction score
0
I tried an image file saved in various formats. This was a flat file - - - no layers:
1) TIFF no compression
2) PSD
3) LZW compressed tiff
4) ZIP compressed tiff
Curiously, LZW compression resulted in the largest file:
1) TIFF no compression = 211.2 MB
2) PSD = 211.2 MB
3) LZW = 262.3 MB
4) ZIP = 199.4 MB
Measuring roughly the time from hitting the space bar to the image appearing (using clicks from a metronome set at 60 clicks per minute):
1) TIFF no compression = 1 second or less
2) PSD = 1 second or less
3) LZW = 4 seconds
4) ZIP = 3 seconds or less
Varying the byte order (IBM or Macintosh) didn't seem to make much difference.

SO: Compression seems to make meaningful difference. If you want to compress the files, use ZIP unless your programs can't handle it.
 
Joined
Jun 11, 2020
Messages
27
Reaction score
0
Yes - using no compression opens the file faster than using LZW, but still not acceptable to me.
(Funny - checking Macintosh for Byte Order slows the operation down ever further.)
 
Ad

Advertisements


Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top