3 ms·
> a lossless format [is] pretty much pointless for photos Why is that? Every edit you make to that photo means that the photo will degrade in quality. I always
by fao_ 9y ago
> a lossless format [is] pretty much pointless for photos
Why is that? Every edit you make to that photo means that the photo will degrade in quality. I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- thrillgore 9y agoThe compromise is that with lossy compression, you can significantly shear the filesize used for retrieval, which granted isn't an issue of speed (but still is for bandwidth consumption).
- floatboth 9y agoIt's a very good thing when your internet connection is crap.
- masklinn 9y ago> I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing? Sure JPEG artefacts are bad, but that can be mitigated (stop compressing so much). Your photos being an order of magnitude larger is worse, and inherent to the way PNG works.
- Dylan16807 9y agoGeneration loss is not inherent to lossy compression. The blame lies mostly or entirely on encoders. Here's an example of doing it right: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IheZzcYUV9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IheZzcYUV9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7vXJbLhTyI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7vXJbLhTyI