3 ms·
That is because the png are not optimized, using lossless PNG compression (OxiPNG + AdvPNG) I get the Lossy LZ4I down to 696819 bytes.
by 1ko 4y ago
That is because the png are not optimized, using lossless PNG compression (OxiPNG + AdvPNG) I get the Lossy LZ4I down to 696819 bytes.
- bscphil 4y agoYes, thank you for pointing this out. To be more precise about it: Original PNG: 1310987 bytes Lossy PNG: 1154386 bytes (90.4% of LZ4i) Lossy LZ4i: 1276477 bytes More Lossy PNG: 693278 bytes More Lossy LZ4i: 818774 bytes (84.7% of LZ4i) So it's notable that this lossy PNG technique has diminishing returns for LZ4i - it actually becomes more effective as a PNG preprocessor as you get more lossy, relative to LZ4i! Still, there's a decent argument that PNG is no longer Pareto-optimal. There's stuff that gets close to the same compression ratio but decompresses much faster, and there's stuff that compresses much better and is also lossless, e.g. JPEG-XL lossless mode.