4 ms·

"Every little helps" but, does it? i mean it sounds like we're talking about taking a few bytes off a probably Xmb or XXmb image.

pjbrunet 13y ago
Depends on the app. Multiply larger size x1000s of images, x1000s of visitors, x days. For offsite backups, 2x the storage cost. My general rule is, any image over 40k is too big for a web page, unless your website is about photography/high-resolution imagery. And I hate jaggies and compression artifacts as much as anybody ;-)
stan_rogers 13y ago
One megabyte is huge for a web image. That's essentially a full-screen 4K/UHD version of a highly-detailed image with no detectable compression artifacts (where "detectable" means "image subtraction doesn't count; zoom in tight and use your eyes") when run through a good optimizing utility. That's good enough for a better-than-acceptable (not optimal, but from a pace or two away most people wouldn't notice) tabloid/A3 print without uprezzing. And there is enough data to support substantial uprezzing before the image goes wonky for those inclined to do so. Now, yer average pro doesn't tend to indulge in the pixel-peeping game (except in private, with the lights down low and the door locked, and always washes his/her hands afterwards), and tends to be reluctant to give away images that can still sell - or at least would prefer it if people kept their own Photoshop/Gimp chocolate out of their personal peanut butter. Even when the images are offered as freebies, there is no reason to force a viewer to download more than they need to make decisions; the hi-rez image will sit behind a link, to be opened at the viewer's discretion. The back button hurts everybody.
- catshirt 13y ago
  who said anything about reducing the filesize by a megabyte? i assumed the EXIF data was maybe a few kb. not sure why i'm being downvoted. i get it, "every little bit" adds up. but here in the real world removing the EXIF data to save bandwidth is a micro optimization 99% of the time.
  - TuringTest 13y ago
    The grandparent meant that you wouldn't be removing a few kbs from "a probably Xmb or XXmb image", since web images aren't that large. You're right that it doesn't make sense to downvote you for that; it was an interesting question.

pjbrunet 13y ago

Depends on the app. Multiply larger size x1000s of images, x1000s of visitors, x days. For offsite backups, 2x the storage cost. My general rule is, any image over 40k is too big for a web page, unless your website is about photography/high-resolution imagery. And I hate jaggies and compression artifacts as much as anybody ;-)

stan_rogers 13y ago

One megabyte is huge for a web image. That's essentially a full-screen 4K/UHD version of a highly-detailed image with no detectable compression artifacts (where "detectable" means "image subtraction doesn't count; zoom in tight and use your eyes") when run through a good optimizing utility. That's good enough for a better-than-acceptable (not optimal, but from a pace or two away most people wouldn't notice) tabloid/A3 print without uprezzing. And there is enough data to support substantial uprezzing before the image goes wonky for those inclined to do so. Now, yer average pro doesn't tend to indulge in the pixel-peeping game (except in private, with the lights down low and the door locked, and always washes his/her hands afterwards), and tends to be reluctant to give away images that can still sell - or at least would prefer it if people kept their own Photoshop/Gimp chocolate out of their personal peanut butter. Even when the images are offered as freebies, there is no reason to force a viewer to download more than they need to make decisions; the hi-rez image will sit behind a link, to be opened at the viewer's discretion. The back button hurts everybody.

catshirt 13y ago
who said anything about reducing the filesize by a megabyte? i assumed the EXIF data was maybe a few kb. not sure why i'm being downvoted. i get it, "every little bit" adds up. but here in the real world removing the EXIF data to save bandwidth is a micro optimization 99% of the time.
- TuringTest 13y ago
  The grandparent meant that you wouldn't be removing a few kbs from "a probably Xmb or XXmb image", since web images aren't that large. You're right that it doesn't make sense to downvote you for that; it was an interesting question.