3 ms·
So the resizing alone makes Imgix very valuable to us. We're in an interesting situation though, where we have relatively few `master` images, but hundreds of r
by lukechesser 10y ago
So the resizing alone makes Imgix very valuable to us. We're in an interesting situation though, where we have relatively few `master` images, but hundreds of renders per image, which are then seen millions of times each month. That's a perfect fit with Imgix's pricing model.
We tried Imgix on a few other products where we had tens of thousands of images being uploaded each month and only seen a couple hundred times per image. That became prohibitively expensive — which is probably a similar situation that you ended up in (high number of `master` images to render ratio).
In addition to realtime resizing, we use:
- face detection
- typesetting
- overlays
- cropping/point of interest cropping
- color palette
- exif/image metadata
- client hints
- automatic content negotiation
Pretty much everything except their watermarking endpoint haha ;)
- anonymoushn 10y agoThat's a lot of stuff! I certainly couldn't make a good argument for writing a replacement for all those features. Thanks!
- Bluestrike2 10y agoOut of curiosity, why are you seeing hundreds of renders per image? I'd think it'd be significantly fewer than that, unless you've got a lot of stuff going on in the background that isn't really obvious--it sounds like you're sometimes doing some significant editing beyond what the photographer has already done.