What are the Maximum Image pixel dimensions Affinity can handle?

[Barney Meyer]

I am creating very large panoramic images and am switching from Photoshop because it has severe pixel dimension limitations.

This link shows an example of a 4Gpx image, 532,000 px wide, consisting of multiple image frames stitched together.

https://www.hiddenmelbourne.com.au/melbourne-from-heidelberg-town-hall-4gpx/

I would like to capture and create larger images for  project which shows the history of Melbourne and process them in a photo editor.

The processing is necessary because objects move and the light changes in the time taken to capture the multiple frames.

What are the dimensional limitations of an Affinity image? Typically, a 360x180° panorama produced from multiple frames captured by my drone is 78k x 39k px ~ 3Gpx 8.5GB Photoshop PSB format file

What file format should I use and what are the maximum pixel dimensions possible  Width x Height in pixels and file format x GB?

My hardware is unconstrained, I can add more RAM and swap drives as required

Looking forward to a solution to my problem!

Barney

[NotMyFault]

Hi Barney,

 

exciting project 👍🏼

Just my 2 cents:

In theory Affinity should handle by far larger pixel dimensions and files than you need.
In practice some users have run into limitations e.g. while stitching panoramas, as well depending on RAM limitations, processing time excessing hours on hight-spec workstation, as well as not yet identified bugs in Photo.

My  advise would be to simply give it a try, using test files e.g containing simple patterns. Resize document is your friend. Try to export and check what works.

Regarding best format to export, have a look at the comparison table under http://jpegxl.info/. Photo does not support Jpegxl, but the table lists most relevant other formats and their limitations (tiff, png, …)

Some websites store such large images in smaller filers and offer a function to seamlessly scroll through the (virtually stitched) image to overcome these limitations.

 

[Barney Meyer]

Thanks for the feedback NotMyFault! 😄

The restraint on image resolution is dictated by atmospheric conditions, ie. how many pixels per degree of the scene can be resolved. 

That view of Melbourne from the Heidelberg Town Hall Tower is a typical problem. I want to show the distant horizon and not a full 360x180° sphere.

Photoshop is unable to handle such large pixel dimensions, no matter what image format I choose. 

I will do some tests on other large images and report back my results.

Also with this "Time-Travel" view of Melbourne, using ca1900's large 10" x 55" Cirkut Camera prints of Melbourne, I am having to limit the resolution at which I scan the old prints and process in Photoshop. These are historic records and the old prints are degrading. I don't want to sacrifice any detail. Our State Library holds many such prints.

https://www.hiddenmelbourne.com.au/time-travel/melbourne-gas-co/

I will work on these problem in Affinity and report back.

Best regards

Barney

[BrianT]

I just tried creating a new document in Photo and the largest document it will allow me to open is 256000x256000.

[Barney Meyer]

Thanks for confirming! Yeah, I find that Affinity can't open the 532k Wide TIF file which PTGUI created.

Looks like I'll just have to put it together in separate parts as I did before.

[NotMyFault]

1 hour ago, Barney Meyer said:

Thanks for confirming! Yeah, I find that Affinity can't open the 532k Wide TIF file which PTGUI created.

Looks like I'll just have to put it together in separate parts as I did before.

That’s interesting. Do you get an error message?
 

I’ve experimented a bit and you can use the crop (and zooming out) tool to create even large files (on iPad)

But I don’t know if the documents handle correctly or you run into an issue later.

 

It seems there is an 32bit value limit for vector objects:

I create a 256000x10000 rectangle and then used to transform tool with “coupled” x/y to increase. Above 80000 for y, the x got truncated.

Edited July 27, 2021 by NotMyFault

[Barney Meyer]

Thanks for the feedback everyone! What is clear is that the specs are confusing and that the photo editors never anticipated or were designed to work with such large images and only anticipate printed formats. 532,000px printed at 120ppi would result in an image over 100m wide!

With wide screens (mine is a modest 1200mm) and zoomable viewers it is nevertheless possible to immerse yourself in a very wide multi-gigapixel view and even step up to the canvas to pixel-peep (by zooming in). PTGUI Pro will stitch the 129 42Mpx image frames, blend and tone-map, but cannot do the final editing required. So, at this time, I have no choice but to stitch in PTGUI, produce two images, edit them individually, then join them again with PTGUI! 

I am also finding it acceptable to split the scene into four quadrants, perfect each, then join them together with a narrow black border between them.

[Barney Meyer]

Good news!

I updated Affinity to v 1.10.1.1142 and my image canvas width is 557372px!

Goodbye Photoshop, Hello Affinity

[raphaelbolius]

Hi everybody.
I am doimg some research on a similar topic. I have to handle stiched images that are made up from 60 - 80 individual shots. Once the images are merged, the total size will be aprox. 20.000px x 15.000px. Then some adjustments (colors, contrast...) have to be done. Maybe I will have to use several layers.

Unfortunately the machine I am using is not built for that kind of work. (Macbook Air, 16GB RAM and M1 Chip) Therefore I have to buy a new Mac, I would prefere a MacbookPro.

Does anybody know how much RAM I will need? As I will buy a new book, the Chip will be either a M1 or M2, most probably a M2. Unfortunately you cannot add RAM anymore to the new generation of Macbooks, once you bought them.

It would be great if somebody could tell me what to buy.
Thanks
Raphael

[thomaso]

1 hour ago, raphaelbolius said:

Once the images are merged, the total size will be aprox. 20.000px x 15.000px. Then some adjustments (colors, contrast...) have to be done. Maybe I will have to use several layers.

Unfortunately the machine I am using is not built for that kind of work. (Macbook Air, 16GB RAM and M1 Chip) Therefore I have to buy a new Mac, I would prefere a MacbookPro.

Are your sure it is a general issue with your specific model? I wonder because the achieved page size is close to a default print preset ("Four Sheet Poster", 18.000 x 12.000 px) + your Macbook / M1 CPU has about 8 cores + is rather new compared to the Affinity compatibility list for macOS versions.

[v_kyr]

 

[raphaelbolius]

10 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

v_kyr, the problem is not affinity it is definitely my Mac that has not enough power. Therefore I look for information which model would be OK.

 

 

[v_kyr]

3 minutes ago, raphaelbolius said:

v_kyr, the problem is not affinity it is definitely my Mac that has not enough power. Therefore I look for information which model would be OK.

See my post there ...

 

[raphaelbolius]

39 minutes ago, thomaso said:

Are your sure it is a general issue with your specific model? I wonder because the achieved page size is close to a default print preset ("Four Sheet Poster", 18.000 x 12.000 px) + your Macbook / M1 CPU has about 8 cores + is rather new compared to the Affinity compatibility list for macOS versions.

No, My Macbook is only a Macbook Air, and it is the smaller one of the two first models with the new m1 chip. But that is exactely the point: a MacbookPro hat 8 cores, mine only has seven. Additionally it has no ventilation, therefore it works gets slower the more it reaches the limit. But, I must admit, that I can (!) work with 80 files that are stitched together. But it is not comfortable at all. Sometimes (e.g. if you use several layers) it stopps working.

My personal thougt goes like this:
MB Air, 16GB RAM, M1 chip, 7 cores >>> I can work, but it is not comfortable at all. It is very unpleasent/ difficult.
MB pro, 32GB RAM, M2 chi, 8 cores >>> I guess it should be OK. Maybe 64GB RAM would be better, but I guess (?) it is not absolutely necessary to buy the 64GB machine.

As I told you, it is rather for a charity, niot for a photostudio that works with it everyday.

Nevertheless I would like to know your opiions. Anyway I could buy 32, test it and exchange it, if it is not OK. But I would prefere not to do like that.

[raphaelbolius]

30 minutes ago, v_kyr said:

See my post there ...

Thanks I gave the long answer there. Here the short version: I think I get closer and closer to the solution. I guess that a MBPro with either 32 or 64GB of RAM should do the job. If 32 is OK, but not as comfortable as 64 I can live with it. I think I will buy 32GB, try it and in worst case, change it later for 64.

 

 

[v_kyr]

29 minutes ago, raphaelbolius said:

I think I get closer and closer to the solution. I guess that a MBPro with either 32 or 64GB of RAM should do the job. If 32 is OK, but not as comfortable as 64 I can live with it. I think I will buy 32GB, try it and in worst case, chage it later for 64.

Well are there any Apple shops or Computer shops with Apple hardware showroom areas there around where you live? - Then you can take a look and do some on site tryouts first. Here in germany I see APh often to be preinstalled for demonstration purposes on Apple hardware in such stores.

• The MacBook Pro models with M1 Pro CPU offer16 GB - 32 GB of RAM.
• For 64 GB you would have to opt for a Macbook Pro model with M1 Max CPU, which of course is sadly a bunch more expensive then!

However (who knows), it's possible that Apple also introduces some updated 14"/16" Macbook Pro models with M2 CPUs too untill the end of the year.

[gigajeff]

On 10/17/2021 at 5:05 AM, Barney Meyer said:

Good news!

I updated Affinity to v 1.10.1.1142 and my image canvas width is 557372px!

Goodbye Photoshop, Hello Affinity

How did you do this? I see a limit of 256,000 pixels.

[GarryP]

Welcome to the forums @gigajeff

You can get a page/width of greater than 256,000 Pixels by, for example, selecting Metres as the UOM, then giving a DPI of 300, then entering a very large width/height, then changing the UOM to Pixels, but it’s not really recommended – see attached image.

[gigajeff]

why is this not recommended? I have stitched panorama output that requires this size canvas.

once I have such a large file open, it will all work, as long as I have the available ram and scratch disk space available?

[GarryP]

I don’t know all of the technical details but (in my limited understanding) the software creates (temporary) rasterised versions of some layers to make drawing quicker and the more massive rasterised layers (256,000 × 256,000 Pixels = 64MP 64 giga-pixels) you have, the worse the software will work as RAM fills up very quickly.

It’s just a recommendation, you can ignore it if you want to as long as you understand the potential problems.

See: 

 

Edited September 15 by GarryP
Added clarification.

[Alfred]

2 hours ago, GarryP said:

256,000 × 256,000 Pixels = 64MP

How do you figure that, Garry? 256,000 × 1,000 pixels is 256 MPix, isn’t it?? And 256,000 × 256,000 pixels is 256 times as much.

[GarryP]

16 hours ago, Alfred said:

How do you figure that, Garry?

Because I’m an idiot who can’t read his calculator properly.

Previous post has been edited to suit, and new brain (not the 80's computer) has been ordered.

[Barney Meyer]

On 7/27/2021 at 3:21 PM, BrianT said:

I just tried creating a new document in Photo and the largest document it will allow me to open is 256000x256000.

Hi Brian, what sort of documents are you creating? 

In my case, I am capturing panoramic images with 100's of overlapping frames, then stitching them together into a large image with PTGUI Pro or PanoramaStudio Pro.

I save these in the .PSB large image format and can open them in Affinity Photo. Photoshop can't handle large images.

Of course, it is totally impractical to present such a large image online in a web browser, because it would take ages to load...if ever.

Here's an example image, 532,000 px wide

https://www.hiddenmelbourne.com.au/melbourne-from-heidelberg-town-hall-4gpx/

regards, Barney

[Barney Meyer]

256000 x 256000 px = 65.5 Gigapixel

At 72 DPI that is an image 3555.6 x 3555.6 inches or about 90 x 90m

That's a HUGE image

[Alfred]

31 minutes ago, Barney Meyer said:

256000 x 256000 px = 65.5 Gigapixel

At 72 DPI that is an image 3555.6 x 3555.6 inches or about 90 x 90m

That's a HUGE image

At 90m × 90m the typical viewing distance is going to be huge, too, so you wouldn’t need a resolution of anywhere near 72 DPI. All of which means that the pixel dimensions can be brought way down below the values currently under discussion.