4 ms·
Facebook has the worst image compression on any website, their photos are compressed to a point where they look horrible. Why would anyone want to use this? I
by Dork1234 8y ago
Facebook has the worst image compression on any website, their photos are compressed to a point where they look horrible. Why would anyone want to use this?
I do not see what this benefits any developer over just using mozjpeg with better settings.
- aboutruby 8y agoTwitter also has pretty bad compression. The worst I know of is Fandom. Reddit on the other hand has great image quality
- seanalltogether 8y agoDo you really not see the benefit in avoiding the need to recreate a bunch of scaffolding around 3 separate image encoders, or is this just an excuse to dump on facebook?
- tyfon 8y agolibimage-magick should be sufficient, however I don't know how well that runs on androids and iphones. It smells like a NIH project to me, but then again there might have been some very special requirements that facebook needed that was not already available in other libraries.
- amrox 8y ago> I don't know how well that runs on androids and iphones. Not well.
- bigiain 8y agoDoes libimage-magick work at all in iOS/Android? At Facebook's scale, the choice of whether to resize/crop/compress images on devices or at the backend must be a complete no-brainer. Why would you stand up additional datacenters instead of just burning a little more of your user's (your "product's"?) battery?