Why QGIS produces georeferenced TIFF files differing in size by two orders of magnitude on the basis of very...











up vote
3
down vote

favorite












I am using QGIS for vectorising some small-scale maps from a historical atlas. The maps are provided as JPEG images 3703 x 4718 ranging roughly from 5 to 9 MB in size. All georeferenced tiff images are roughly from 40 to 100 MB. But one. One of the maps, which is by no means remarkable and processed in exactly the same manner as the others results in a 5+ GB TIFF file which is nearly unmanageable.



What may be the cause of that?



Software details: QGIS 3.4.2-Madeira under Ubuntu 16.04.



Source image is imported as: "Unknown datum based on Bessel 1841 ellipsoid".



Transformation settings are: "Transformation type: Thin Plate Spline / Resampling method : Cubic / Target SRS: EPSG:4326 - WGS 84 / Compression: none"










share|improve this question









New contributor




Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
























    up vote
    3
    down vote

    favorite












    I am using QGIS for vectorising some small-scale maps from a historical atlas. The maps are provided as JPEG images 3703 x 4718 ranging roughly from 5 to 9 MB in size. All georeferenced tiff images are roughly from 40 to 100 MB. But one. One of the maps, which is by no means remarkable and processed in exactly the same manner as the others results in a 5+ GB TIFF file which is nearly unmanageable.



    What may be the cause of that?



    Software details: QGIS 3.4.2-Madeira under Ubuntu 16.04.



    Source image is imported as: "Unknown datum based on Bessel 1841 ellipsoid".



    Transformation settings are: "Transformation type: Thin Plate Spline / Resampling method : Cubic / Target SRS: EPSG:4326 - WGS 84 / Compression: none"










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      up vote
      3
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      3
      down vote

      favorite











      I am using QGIS for vectorising some small-scale maps from a historical atlas. The maps are provided as JPEG images 3703 x 4718 ranging roughly from 5 to 9 MB in size. All georeferenced tiff images are roughly from 40 to 100 MB. But one. One of the maps, which is by no means remarkable and processed in exactly the same manner as the others results in a 5+ GB TIFF file which is nearly unmanageable.



      What may be the cause of that?



      Software details: QGIS 3.4.2-Madeira under Ubuntu 16.04.



      Source image is imported as: "Unknown datum based on Bessel 1841 ellipsoid".



      Transformation settings are: "Transformation type: Thin Plate Spline / Resampling method : Cubic / Target SRS: EPSG:4326 - WGS 84 / Compression: none"










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      I am using QGIS for vectorising some small-scale maps from a historical atlas. The maps are provided as JPEG images 3703 x 4718 ranging roughly from 5 to 9 MB in size. All georeferenced tiff images are roughly from 40 to 100 MB. But one. One of the maps, which is by no means remarkable and processed in exactly the same manner as the others results in a 5+ GB TIFF file which is nearly unmanageable.



      What may be the cause of that?



      Software details: QGIS 3.4.2-Madeira under Ubuntu 16.04.



      Source image is imported as: "Unknown datum based on Bessel 1841 ellipsoid".



      Transformation settings are: "Transformation type: Thin Plate Spline / Resampling method : Cubic / Target SRS: EPSG:4326 - WGS 84 / Compression: none"







      qgis georeferencing






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 3 hours ago









      PolyGeo

      53k1779238




      53k1779238






      New contributor




      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 5 hours ago









      Alexei Kouprianov

      362




      362




      New contributor




      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          By default I don't believe QGIS applies and type of lossy or lossless compression to exported images.



          When you are ready to export the georeferenced image, there are some options available to begin compressing the images.



          There is the compression option but seems a little limited and offers 4 options:




          • none

          • LZW

          • Packbits

          • Deflate


          But it might be better to choose something like None, which will result in a large file, but this is a scratch dataset that you can consider disposing of if the next step is successful!



          With the new large tiff in QGIS. You can right-click it and choose Export > Save As...



          That opens the Save raster layer as... window and in there look for Create Options and place a checkmark there.



          This will enable the profile settings which have some sane defaults like High Compression which I think is lossless and JPEG Compression which might be lossy.





          Another culprit for the single tiff you have being so large is that it's extent is rather large and could be filling in with nodata or some other value.






          share|improve this answer





















          • The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
            – Alexei Kouprianov
            4 hours ago












          • ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
            – SaultDon
            4 hours ago










          • Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
            – Alexei Kouprianov
            4 hours ago


















          up vote
          2
          down vote













          Solved. The whole thing was caused by a huge misprint in the coordinates of one of the many points used for georeferencing (it was 755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East).






          share|improve this answer








          New contributor




          Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
          Check out our Code of Conduct.


















            Your Answer








            StackExchange.ready(function() {
            var channelOptions = {
            tags: "".split(" "),
            id: "79"
            };
            initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

            StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
            // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
            if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
            StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
            createEditor();
            });
            }
            else {
            createEditor();
            }
            });

            function createEditor() {
            StackExchange.prepareEditor({
            heartbeatType: 'answer',
            convertImagesToLinks: false,
            noModals: true,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: null,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            imageUploader: {
            brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
            contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
            allowUrls: true
            },
            onDemand: true,
            discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
            ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
            });


            }
            });






            Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f306102%2fwhy-qgis-produces-georeferenced-tiff-files-differing-in-size-by-two-orders-of-ma%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown

























            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes








            2 Answers
            2






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            2
            down vote













            By default I don't believe QGIS applies and type of lossy or lossless compression to exported images.



            When you are ready to export the georeferenced image, there are some options available to begin compressing the images.



            There is the compression option but seems a little limited and offers 4 options:




            • none

            • LZW

            • Packbits

            • Deflate


            But it might be better to choose something like None, which will result in a large file, but this is a scratch dataset that you can consider disposing of if the next step is successful!



            With the new large tiff in QGIS. You can right-click it and choose Export > Save As...



            That opens the Save raster layer as... window and in there look for Create Options and place a checkmark there.



            This will enable the profile settings which have some sane defaults like High Compression which I think is lossless and JPEG Compression which might be lossy.





            Another culprit for the single tiff you have being so large is that it's extent is rather large and could be filling in with nodata or some other value.






            share|improve this answer





















            • The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago












            • ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
              – SaultDon
              4 hours ago










            • Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago















            up vote
            2
            down vote













            By default I don't believe QGIS applies and type of lossy or lossless compression to exported images.



            When you are ready to export the georeferenced image, there are some options available to begin compressing the images.



            There is the compression option but seems a little limited and offers 4 options:




            • none

            • LZW

            • Packbits

            • Deflate


            But it might be better to choose something like None, which will result in a large file, but this is a scratch dataset that you can consider disposing of if the next step is successful!



            With the new large tiff in QGIS. You can right-click it and choose Export > Save As...



            That opens the Save raster layer as... window and in there look for Create Options and place a checkmark there.



            This will enable the profile settings which have some sane defaults like High Compression which I think is lossless and JPEG Compression which might be lossy.





            Another culprit for the single tiff you have being so large is that it's extent is rather large and could be filling in with nodata or some other value.






            share|improve this answer





















            • The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago












            • ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
              – SaultDon
              4 hours ago










            • Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago













            up vote
            2
            down vote










            up vote
            2
            down vote









            By default I don't believe QGIS applies and type of lossy or lossless compression to exported images.



            When you are ready to export the georeferenced image, there are some options available to begin compressing the images.



            There is the compression option but seems a little limited and offers 4 options:




            • none

            • LZW

            • Packbits

            • Deflate


            But it might be better to choose something like None, which will result in a large file, but this is a scratch dataset that you can consider disposing of if the next step is successful!



            With the new large tiff in QGIS. You can right-click it and choose Export > Save As...



            That opens the Save raster layer as... window and in there look for Create Options and place a checkmark there.



            This will enable the profile settings which have some sane defaults like High Compression which I think is lossless and JPEG Compression which might be lossy.





            Another culprit for the single tiff you have being so large is that it's extent is rather large and could be filling in with nodata or some other value.






            share|improve this answer












            By default I don't believe QGIS applies and type of lossy or lossless compression to exported images.



            When you are ready to export the georeferenced image, there are some options available to begin compressing the images.



            There is the compression option but seems a little limited and offers 4 options:




            • none

            • LZW

            • Packbits

            • Deflate


            But it might be better to choose something like None, which will result in a large file, but this is a scratch dataset that you can consider disposing of if the next step is successful!



            With the new large tiff in QGIS. You can right-click it and choose Export > Save As...



            That opens the Save raster layer as... window and in there look for Create Options and place a checkmark there.



            This will enable the profile settings which have some sane defaults like High Compression which I think is lossless and JPEG Compression which might be lossy.





            Another culprit for the single tiff you have being so large is that it's extent is rather large and could be filling in with nodata or some other value.







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered 4 hours ago









            SaultDon

            7,72812561




            7,72812561












            • The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago












            • ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
              – SaultDon
              4 hours ago










            • Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago


















            • The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago












            • ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
              – SaultDon
              4 hours ago










            • Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
              – Alexei Kouprianov
              4 hours ago
















            The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
            – Alexei Kouprianov
            4 hours ago






            The export parameters are the same for all files, I use "Compression: none" very consistently. Geometry of the neighbouring file is nearly the same (there are corners filled with black, but they are of similar proportions to those in other files). For some unknown reason, however, the smaller neighbour is converted to a 6684x3037 TIFF, while the bigger one to a 337868x5258 TIFF. I see no reason for this huge width... The TIFF, when loaded in QGIS as a raster layer, fits its position perfectly but renders very sllow.
            – Alexei Kouprianov
            4 hours ago














            ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
            – SaultDon
            4 hours ago




            ah. k I suspected that with my last statement in the answer. so I would recommend maybe clipping the Raster to your desired extent or study area. Hard to say for sure why the extent change. I dont remember this being an issue pre Qgis 3 but did see it when re-projecting certain rasters.
            – SaultDon
            4 hours ago












            Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
            – Alexei Kouprianov
            4 hours ago




            Solved! Solved! Thank you! Your suggestion to pay attention to the file parameters made me to reconsider the graphical file dimensions. The extreme width of the file made me suspicious and I discovered a huge misprint in one of the 141 points (755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East) which escaped my attention before. How stupid... )
            – Alexei Kouprianov
            4 hours ago












            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Solved. The whole thing was caused by a huge misprint in the coordinates of one of the many points used for georeferencing (it was 755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East).






            share|improve this answer








            New contributor




            Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
            Check out our Code of Conduct.






















              up vote
              2
              down vote













              Solved. The whole thing was caused by a huge misprint in the coordinates of one of the many points used for georeferencing (it was 755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East).






              share|improve this answer








              New contributor




              Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
              Check out our Code of Conduct.




















                up vote
                2
                down vote










                up vote
                2
                down vote









                Solved. The whole thing was caused by a huge misprint in the coordinates of one of the many points used for georeferencing (it was 755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East).






                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                Solved. The whole thing was caused by a huge misprint in the coordinates of one of the many points used for georeferencing (it was 755.3261 East instead of 75.3261 East).







                share|improve this answer








                New contributor




                Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer






                New contributor




                Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.









                answered 4 hours ago









                Alexei Kouprianov

                362




                362




                New contributor




                Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.





                New contributor





                Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.






                Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
                Check out our Code of Conduct.






















                    Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










                    draft saved

                    draft discarded


















                    Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













                    Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












                    Alexei Kouprianov is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















                    Thanks for contributing an answer to Geographic Information Systems Stack Exchange!


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





                    Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


                    Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


                    • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                    But avoid



                    • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                    • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                    To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function () {
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fgis.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f306102%2fwhy-qgis-produces-georeferenced-tiff-files-differing-in-size-by-two-orders-of-ma%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                    }
                    );

                    Post as a guest















                    Required, but never shown





















































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown

































                    Required, but never shown














                    Required, but never shown












                    Required, but never shown







                    Required, but never shown







                    Popular posts from this blog

                    Willebadessen

                    Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten

                    Residenzschloss Arolsen