Which is similar to what the Mozilla folks have done with MOZJpeg (Although they explicitly state that their project does break some compatibility). If your application doesn’t need this extra data, then removing it from the JPG files can yield a significant improvement.īut it turns out there’s quite a bit more you can do with the format.įor starters, tools like JPEGMini are geared towards finding lower quality (lossy) compression w/o disrupting the visual fidelity of your images too much. This is why your photo sharing service knows the geolocation of the last waffle you ate, and what camera you took it with. See, much like PNG, JPG also supports some chunk data in the file format, which means photo editors or cameras can insert non picture information into the file. That’s around a 90% file size reduction, for a simple red square. For example, check out the file size difference when you save a JPG from photoshop, vs “exporting for web”:
Once you start looking at JPG compression methods, and the file format, you’ll start to realize that, much like PNG files, there’s plenty of room for improvement. As such I’ve assembled a handy collection of things that can help you squeeze out those last bits, and make a better experience for your users. While JPG compression is impressive in its’ own right, how you use it in your application can influence the size of these files significantly. With the Average webpage size now larger than the original DOOM game, you have to start asking where all the bytes are coming from, and how you can do more to toss those things out (Don’t get me started on the sizes of mobile apps…). Which is why it’s so important to make sure these JPG files are as small as possible. JPGs are a part of your job, and critical to the experience of the users who benefit from that work. Doesn’t matter if you’re a web dev, mobile dev, or some weird sysadmin who just sends around memes all day. If you’re a modern developer, then you use JPG files.
0 kommentar(er)
