4 ms·

They should just be made properly - a properly made PDF is less than a megabyte, and model pictures should be just hundreds of KB. Takes a lot of models and in

They should just be made properly - a properly made PDF is less than a megabyte, and model pictures should be just hundreds of KB. Takes a lot of models and instructions to burn hundreds of megs that way.

maccard 2y ago
Eh, I disagree. High res images are big no matter what way you cut it, and my mobile resolution is 2550x1800 - I don’t mind the detail. But I don’t need that detail for 15 different toothbrush models.
- RedShift1 2y ago
  A 3840x2160 jpeg image at 100% quality is somewhere between 2 and 3 MB, so 15 models makes 45 MB, still way short of + 300 MB for the app.
  - maccard 2y ago
    2.5MB is about an order of magnitude larger than the OP's hundreds of KB. I'd be fine with 3MB. But they should still be pulled on demand.
  - arghwhat 2y ago
    JPEG at 100% quality makes very little sense - the goal is to dial it down to the lowest value where artifacts are still low enough to not notice. AVIF also has much better behavior in the artifact department, letting you go much lower without introducing artifacts - you simply loose detail, which is no issue in a largely smooth product photo. For reference, my own photos downscaled to 3840x2560 AVIF for sharing purposes range from 500KB to 2MB depending on how "busy" the image is. The off-camera 6000x4000 JPEG is ~7MB in comparison. I stand by my opinion that a few hundred KB per image is plenty at the required resolution for model photos in an app.
  - vel0city 2y ago
    > The largest is `Sonos_M9_rose` at 7.8 MB So only twice the size of your JPEG example. Looking at the area chart of the files, it looks like the majority of the assets are less than that 2-3MB. https://xcancel.com/pic/orig/media%2FGWAYmxabsAApjwu.png https://xcancel.com/pic/orig/media%2FGWAYmxabsAApjwu.png There's probably over 200 or so assets in that 233MB archive.
- arghwhat 2y ago
  Luckily we do not have to rely on opinion. Take this 1204x800 real-world photo which is less than 80KB: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/link-u/avif-sample-images/master/fox.profile0.8bpc.yuv420.avif https://raw.githubusercontent.com/link-u/avif-sample-images/... That's slightly less than half the height and width of your phone's screen respectively, so a decent representative of a model photo dimensions (which are usually widgets smaller than the screen). Model images would compress much better as they are edited to be much cleaner with smoothed solid colors and either solid or transparent backgrounds, and for something like a toothbrush you'd have an incredibly narrow image geometry making the final image likely much smaller. Even if you'd consider this image too small or too low resolution, bumping those would not push us past 150 or maybe maximum 200KB. (That repo has plenty of examples of other configuration examples if one is curious.)
- colecut 2y ago
  does anyone really need that level of detail for even their own toothbrush model?

maccard 2y ago

Eh, I disagree. High res images are big no matter what way you cut it, and my mobile resolution is 2550x1800 - I don’t mind the detail. But I don’t need that detail for 15 different toothbrush models.

RedShift1 2y ago
A 3840x2160 jpeg image at 100% quality is somewhere between 2 and 3 MB, so 15 models makes 45 MB, still way short of + 300 MB for the app.
- maccard 2y ago
  2.5MB is about an order of magnitude larger than the OP's hundreds of KB. I'd be fine with 3MB. But they should still be pulled on demand.
- arghwhat 2y ago
  JPEG at 100% quality makes very little sense - the goal is to dial it down to the lowest value where artifacts are still low enough to not notice. AVIF also has much better behavior in the artifact department, letting you go much lower without introducing artifacts - you simply loose detail, which is no issue in a largely smooth product photo. For reference, my own photos downscaled to 3840x2560 AVIF for sharing purposes range from 500KB to 2MB depending on how "busy" the image is. The off-camera 6000x4000 JPEG is ~7MB in comparison. I stand by my opinion that a few hundred KB per image is plenty at the required resolution for model photos in an app.
- vel0city 2y ago
  > The largest is `Sonos_M9_rose` at 7.8 MB So only twice the size of your JPEG example. Looking at the area chart of the files, it looks like the majority of the assets are less than that 2-3MB. https://xcancel.com/pic/orig/media%2FGWAYmxabsAApjwu.png https://xcancel.com/pic/orig/media%2FGWAYmxabsAApjwu.png There's probably over 200 or so assets in that 233MB archive.
arghwhat 2y ago
Luckily we do not have to rely on opinion. Take this 1204x800 real-world photo which is less than 80KB: https://raw.githubusercontent.com/link-u/avif-sample-images/master/fox.profile0.8bpc.yuv420.avif https://raw.githubusercontent.com/link-u/avif-sample-images/... That's slightly less than half the height and width of your phone's screen respectively, so a decent representative of a model photo dimensions (which are usually widgets smaller than the screen). Model images would compress much better as they are edited to be much cleaner with smoothed solid colors and either solid or transparent backgrounds, and for something like a toothbrush you'd have an incredibly narrow image geometry making the final image likely much smaller. Even if you'd consider this image too small or too low resolution, bumping those would not push us past 150 or maybe maximum 200KB. (That repo has plenty of examples of other configuration examples if one is curious.)
colecut 2y ago
does anyone really need that level of detail for even their own toothbrush model?