7 ms·
Show HN: Jpeg.io – Convert any major image format into a highly optimized JPEG
- Kiro 10y agoCool. When would you want to use JPEG over PNG though? I don't know much about these things (just using PNG/SVG everywhere).
- izacus 10y agoPretty much everywhere where you're not forced to use PNG. JPEG is significantly smaller and on most devices faster to decode.
- jimboj 10y agoIt totally depends on the situation, JPEG isn't always smaller, and it's lossy unlike PNG. Flat colour images like logos will be smaller as PNG, and look better too. PNGs also support transparency.
- izacus 10y agoYes, this is kinda what I mean with "where you're not forced to use PNG". If you need transparency or you have tiny flat colored icons, PNG is better. For any kind of complex images JPEG tends to be even 10x or so smaller.
- GordonS 10y agoSome images get better compression with JPEG than PNG - photographs in particular.
- colmvp 10y agoMy rule of thumb: If the image has few colours, PNG is typically better as you can retain maximum quality with little degradation compared to JPG (e.g. a logo, an illustration). If the image is complex with a lot of colours/shades (e.g. a photograph, an illustration with dozens of colours), JPEG is typically better.
- barrkel 10y agoAny time it's a photographic image (rather than a drawing, diagram or rasterised vector image).
- jerrycruncher 10y agoThis. Here's a quick guide: JPG - Use for photographic images only. GIF/PNG-8 - Use for line-art, logos, etc. PNG-24 - This is a a lossless format/TIFF replacement and generally shouldn't be used for production sites.
- tedmiston 10y ago> PNG-24 - ... generally shouldn't be used for production sites. But it is sometimes of course, particularly when the designer does not want the PNG restricted to 256 colors. For example, suppose that your logo is a single lowercase letter with an overlaid multicolor gradient rainbow, the banding in the transitions becomes super pronounced in PNG-8. Beyond that, SVG can replace a lot of what PNG has been used for on the web for the past couple decades.
- vog 10y agoFrom a technical point of view, this is a great way to collect more real-world image datasets to test and optimize their algorithms against. Moreover, from a business point of view, this is a great way to collect pictures that are usually not published by other means (e.g. Flickr), but I don't quite see how this could be exploited without copyright infringement.
- kowdermeister 10y agoLook at the bottom, it's powered by Kraken.io. This service is just a nice acquisition channel for them while providing something useful. I like these win-win scenarios.
- vog 10y ago> just a nice acquisition channel My point was that it is not just an acquisition channel, but also a great way to collect more sample images for their algorithms.
- tedmiston 10y agoI totally agree. I suppose the parent comment could be referring to customer acquisition or acquiring real world sample image data.
- kowdermeister 10y agoI was about to share it, but FB cached something crap: http://imgur.com/a/2yfDC http://imgur.com/a/2yfDC I was about to refetch it for you, but the FB debug tool throw some error.
- mcjiggerlog 10y agoReally nice tool, but I'm not getting the best results in terms of size optimization so far: http://i.imgur.com/2lfx3P8.png http://i.imgur.com/2lfx3P8.png I guess "highly optimized" is a rather ambiguous term. Maybe add a slider for quality <------> compression?
- VertexRed 10y agoProgressive jpgs increase the size
- mcjiggerlog 10y agoFor anyone else who also didn't know what progressive jpegs are - https://www.wired.com/2013/01/the-return-of-the-progressive-jpeg/ https://www.wired.com/2013/01/the-return-of-the-progressive-...
- VertexRed 10y agoWhen I was experimenting with PS a few years ago, progressive JPEGs were always larger than baseline which is why I came to that conclusion. This isn't however the full picture. To keep it short, baseline JPEGs are usually smaller if the file size is less than 10 KB. Useful article about progressive JPEG sizes: http://yuiblog.com/blog/2008/12/05/imageopt-4/ http://yuiblog.com/blog/2008/12/05/imageopt-4/
- mozinator 10y agoHow do jpeg.io's proprietery JPEG optimization algorithms perform compared to JPEG2000, webp or re-jpeg ?
- Diti 10y agoI am pretty sure “Kraken.io's proprietery JPEG optimization algorithms” is based on the Psychovisual Error Threeshold: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6530010/ http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6530010/ Have a read at what Google engineer Colt McAnlis has to show about it: https://medium.com/@duhroach/reducing-jpg-file-size-e5b27df3257c https://medium.com/@duhroach/reducing-jpg-file-size-e5b27df3...
- xycodex 10y agono pdf?
- Retr0spectrum 10y agoIn what scenario would that be useful? I'm just curious.
- nidu 10y agoProbably when you accidentally scanned a document to PDF. Or when you received a document in PDF from some nasty man.
- pwython 10y agoDid a quick comparison test with this beautiful piece of artwork I just created. original http://i.pi.gy/0K7d.png http://i.pi.gy/0K7d.png (2.1 MB) jpeg.io http://i.pi.gy/AP8v.jpg http://i.pi.gy/AP8v.jpg (102 KB) Photoshop 60% jpeg Export http://i.pi.gy/Wr4P.jpg http://i.pi.gy/Wr4P.jpg (90 KB) tinypng.com http://i.pi.gy/ndKA.png http://i.pi.gy/ndKA.png (74 KB) Note pi.gy does not compress uploads.
- karim79 10y agoI would note that tinypng is not converting it into a JPG, so that's not really a valid comparison - the result is quantized and dithered PNG (256 colours) and not a JPG.
- wscott 10y agoSince he doesn't summarize the test above, let me. The jpeg.io result is bigger than the other two and noticeably worse quality. The problems were with the sharp lines. Perhaps jpeg.io specializes in photo-realistic pictures rather than graphics and logos.
- iplaw 10y agoThat was your take away from the comparison? Wow ... I fail to see how the jpeg.io is worse than the other two examples.
- Paulods 10y agoLook closely around the red and yellow rectangles and just about and edge meeting the blue and you will see. Open all 3 and tab one to the next and you will notice the big difference.
- sathackr 10y agoupon first glance it looks like the lines are blurry in the jpeg.io one compared to the original and other two. If you zoom in a bit that may still be the case, but it looks like the overall image quality is much better. The photoshop export has significant artifacts visible, while the jpeg.io compressed image has far fewer visible artifacts. The tinypng version isn't jpeg compressed but shows dithering as you would expect from a GIF file.
- the_duke 10y agoPDF support would be nice.
- Coffeewine 10y agoHas anyone gotten it to accept a webp image as input? It threw 'Error while processing this file' for the ~10 files I attempted with. They were all created with cwebp and the photo preset. I was, of course, quite curious if it could improve upon file size, as that was the main reason I was using webp in the first place.
- ComodoHacker 10y agoWorked for me with a file from Opera Turbo. The result was about two times bigger (as expected). To make comparisons though, you shouldn't use webp as input, use original instead.
- guessmyname 10y agoStrange, I uploaded this PNG [1] and it came 14,917 bytes larger: $ ls -lhias -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 2845 Sep 28 07:58 colors.png -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 17762 Sep 28 07:59 optimized.jpg EDIT: Disregard, it's because of the addition of the white pixels. [1] https://gist.github.com/anonymous/de2f5f8e6ecb5881e1357ebaf4954ea2 https://gist.github.com/anonymous/de2f5f8e6ecb5881e1357ebaf4...
- malinens 10y agoCool. But I prefer tinyjpg or tinypng
- fredley 10y agoWhy?
- omginternets 10y agoForgive me, but why on earth would I want to use JPG in the age of PNG?
- yoklov 10y agoFile size is probably the biggest reason.
- codazoda 10y agoAre you serious? A digital photo translated to PNG is going to be quite large. PNG has it's place, for sure, but it doesn't compress photographs like JPEG does. PNG is great for line art, solid color vector that has been rasterized, etc. JPG is great for photos.
- omginternets 10y ago>Are you serious? Perfectly. I'm not very familiar with image compression and JPEG conjures up images of pixellated atrocities. It seems like either progress has been made in this domain or most JPEG encoders on the internet are poorly configured (in which case the present webapp makes sense).
- jerrycruncher 10y agoI think it's more likely that a pixelated jpg is a result of the creator using the wrong format (ie, using jpg where gif/png-8 would have been more appropriate) or over-compressing the image. PNG-24 is a lossless format, and generally shouldn't be used for production sites.
- mod 10y agoPerhaps if you were, I don't know, the biggest photography site on the internet: https://www.flickr.com/ https://www.flickr.com/ (Or one of the others: https://500px.com/photo/20852455/-by-maxim-gurtovoy https://500px.com/photo/20852455/-by-maxim-gurtovoy https://1x.com/ https://1x.com/) JPEG is used for any type of complex image as PNG compression can't compare.
- dvh 10y agoThe amount of people in this thread who don't understand what is JPEG and PNG for is staggering!
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- projectsymphony 10y agoHas anybody tried mozjpeg? https://github.com/mozilla/mozjpeg https://github.com/mozilla/mozjpeg It works much better than any of the alternatives listed here, I'm surprised noone mentioned it yet. Here is an image compressed to the same size with mozjpeg http://m8y.org/hn/12597098.jpeg http://m8y.org/hn/12597098.jpeg jpeg.io http://i.pi.gy/AP8v.jpg http://i.pi.gy/AP8v.jpg
- bluthru 10y agoMozJPEG is especially impressive at reducing artifacts around text: http://calendar.perfplanet.com/2014/mozjpeg-3-0/ http://calendar.perfplanet.com/2014/mozjpeg-3-0/
- aluhut 10y ago> If you want to run MozJPEG on your own machine, then you’ll need to use an ugly command-line program. :( And I'm out.
- projectsymphony 10y agohttps://www.npmjs.com/browse/keyword/mozjpeg https://www.npmjs.com/browse/keyword/mozjpeg https://github.com/as-com/mozjpeg-js https://github.com/as-com/mozjpeg-js
- TazeTSchnitzel 10y agoCommand-line-only apps are typical of this genre of software (pngquant, pngcrush, all the webp utilities, ffmpeg, etc.) However, sometimes there are GUI apps which wrap the tool itself.
- aluhut 10y agoThere has been a request pending for it on the IrfanView forums for 3 years now ;)
- sinak 10y ago
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- SirKaliKook 10y agoSo do these do anything different than making image magick available in the browser?
- cmurf 10y agoWhat about openjpeg.org?
- jarcane 10y agoPlease stop using .io domains. https://gigaom.com/2014/06/30/the-dark-side-of-io-how-the-u-k-is-making-web-domain-profits-from-a-shady-cold-war-land-deal/ https://gigaom.com/2014/06/30/the-dark-side-of-io-how-the-u-...
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]
- blt 10y agoNo privacy policy on the main or "About" page. If you upload an image, who knows what the site operator will do with it? Without any kind of limit spelled out, we must assume the worst. OP, unless the main goal of this site is to harvest images from oblivious people, please add a privacy notice.