3 ms·

I just ran a quick comparison on two big ecommerce sites I'm familiar with. I know for a fact they performed as much optimization as they possible could in thei

I just ran a quick comparison on two big ecommerce sites I'm familiar with. I know for a fact they performed as much optimization as they possible could in their respective file formats Webp and .jpg file both had similar dimensions, picture detail complexity, and dpi. Webp format came out to 50% smaller file size I didn't have enoughof a sampling and/or tests though. I personally don't think image optimization with webp should be a thing though. The lack of native web support is one issue, the next is lack of native support on windows OS is another. Two things IMO are most important about image optimization for heavy-image load sites. One is lazyloading.js (frontend library) via specifying a class for those images past a threshold browser height on the backend. Most notably this is used in many ecommerce sites, but on analysis amazon doesn't seem to be using this. Next would be sprite compression of common social links. A great example of this is amazon actually, checkout this image I extracted from from their webpage. https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/gno/sprites/nav-sprite-global_bluebeacon-V3-2x_optimized._CB474516457_.png https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/G/01/gno/spri...

Cthulhu_ 8y ago
I think with images, just as with videos, there will never be a consensus; some people will insist on certain proprietary formats, forever. At least there's standards now, so that you can provide fallbacks - if you as a website owner would e.g. prefer people use webp because it compresses more than jpg then you can offer both, without forcing one or the other on them. I wouldn't mind a solution on the server-side though, where in your html you just put an img tag and the server determines what the best format is based on browser support. Of course, that would mean there'd be a header (or some smart user agent analysis) for every image request, and you'd like to keep that overhead to a minimum.

Cthulhu_ 8y ago

I think with images, just as with videos, there will never be a consensus; some people will insist on certain proprietary formats, forever. At least there's standards now, so that you can provide fallbacks - if you as a website owner would e.g. prefer people use webp because it compresses more than jpg then you can offer both, without forcing one or the other on them. I wouldn't mind a solution on the server-side though, where in your html you just put an img tag and the server determines what the best format is based on browser support. Of course, that would mean there'd be a header (or some smart user agent analysis) for every image request, and you'd like to keep that overhead to a minimum.