4 ms·
> I wasn’t building it for fun: I work for Uploadcare and resizing images has always been a practical issue with on-the-fly image processing. you ever consider
by gfody 9y ago
> I wasn’t building it for fun: I work for Uploadcare and resizing images has always been a practical issue with on-the-fly image processing.
you ever consider pushing the work entirely to the client with a resize implemented in javascript? that would cut down on bandwidth as well.
- nneonneo 9y agoHe's scaling images down, not up. Think taking an uploaded smartphone picture (multiple megapixels) and scaling it down to thumbnail-sized images for various screens.
- gfody 9y agoic - I thought it was just the usual image-downsample-and-upload thing you see everywhere. even so, if the service is hosting your images in multiple resolutions you could do it all client side at upload time. they'd be trading bandwidth for cpu time.
- striking 9y agoBandwidth is more valuable than CPU time when communicating across the wider internet.
- igordebatur 9y agoUploadcare supports shrinking images before uploading, https://uploadcare.com/documentation/widget/#image-shrink https://uploadcare.com/documentation/widget/#image-shrink (I'm one of co-founders)
- homm 9y agoIt's exactly what my previous article "Image resize in browsers is broken" is about ) https://blog.uploadcare.com/image-resize-in-browsers-is-broken-e38eed08df01 https://blog.uploadcare.com/image-resize-in-browsers-is-brok... It originally was written two years ago, so some things have changed. But in general, it is still correct: for most browsers, you need to combine several ugly technics to get suitable results. Though, the quality will have nothing common with quality when you have direct access to hardware.