3 ms·

Unfortunately it looks like it's subject to the same limitation of the Google Photos API: Photo download compresses the photos even if you ask for the original

Unfortunately it looks like it's subject to the same limitation of the Google Photos API: Photo download compresses the photos even if you ask for the original file https://gilesknap.github.io/gphotos-sync/main/explanations/googleapiissues.html#pending-api-issues https://gilesknap.github.io/gphotos-sync/main/explanations/g... I've been putting off a Google photos back up for years, and this was my excuse - waiting for this issue to be resolved. But I'm being a fool, 60% compression is better than losing everything.

buro9 4y ago
Ah you are correct. I have just compared originals I had which were uploaded to Google Photos vs the ones downloaded. Visually there is a barely perceptible difference in a side-by-side comparison on a high quality and calibrated monitor. I wouldn't have noticed if it weren't side-by-side and zoomed in. On the file size, it's gone from a 6MB jpeg down to about a 1.5MB jpeg. On the smaller files that difference is far less, but jpegs above 3MB seem to see the biggest reduction in file size. Thankfully I have all of my originals that weren't taken on the phone camera so I don't mind this so much as running my exiftool script over the original archive produces the same naming convention and I can merge those folders and still have the originals I care about. Sheesh though... such a thing for Google to screw up on.