3 ms·
Not really surprising, given that the original image seems to be compressed very conservatively: 13,290,914 original.jpeg 15,357,049 magick-q99.jpg
by lifthrasiir 2y ago
Not really surprising, given that the original image seems to be compressed very conservatively:
13,290,914 original.jpeg
15,357,049 magick-q99.jpg
13,323,544 magick-q98.jpg
12,197,196 magick-q97.jpg
10,745,457 magick-q96.jpg
8,577,000 magick-q95.jpg
7,933,287 magick-q94.jpg
7,360,975 magick-q93.jpg
15,386,195 magick-rot90-q99.jpg
13,325,385 magick-rot90-q98.jpg
12,115,271 magick-rot90-q97.jpg
10,733,896 magick-rot90-q96.jpg
8,661,101 magick-rot90-q95.jpg
7,962,175 magick-rot90-q94.jpg
7,343,580 magick-rot90-q93.jpg
Here all `magick-[rot-]qXX.jpg` files come from `convert original.jpeg [-rotate 90] -quality XX magick-qXX.jpg`, where my ImageMagick version is 7.1.1-12 (Windows x86-64, Q16-HDRI). The initial shrinkage is solely from the lossy compression process and doesn't depend on the rotation angle that much.