pngcrush gets it down to 21.1 kB with no loss of quality.
I tried posting the file, but Lemmy converts it to the atrocious webp format automatically.
EDIT: JPEG-XL clocks in at just 16.3 kB, again with no loss of quality.the atrocious webp format
I continue to be confused by the level of widespread hate WebP still gets. It’s old enough to be widely (albeit not universally) supported in software like web browsers, but new enough to provide similar-or-better (usually better) lossless compression than PNG (21,578 bytes for the original image) and typically better lossy compression than JPEG at comparable perceived quality, especially for the types of images typically shared on the internet (rather than say, images saved directly from a DLSR camera). It’s why servers bother to re-encode JPEG images to WebP for delivery - they wouldn’t bother wasting the compute time to re-compress if it wasn’t generally worth doing.
I can understand it if we were, say, 10-15 years ago when the format was still not super widely supported yet, but that’s basically where we are with JPEG XL and AVIF support right now too. If one of these two had exactly the level of support that WebP does right now then yes, of course we should probably use one of them instead - but we’re not there yet. Until we are, WebP often has the best compromise between compatibility and compression efficiency as far as image formats go, and that’s why a lot of sites do this re-compression thing using WebP. I gave some examples using digital art (one of the things I was compressing a lot at the time) a year ago in a related discussion: https://lemmy.world/post/6665251/4462007
A news website local to me recently-ish started choosing to deliver AVIF-compressed (or probably re-compressed) images the same way a lot of sites currently do it for WebP because my browser supports AVIF, so at least we are starting to see a token amount of uptake on the next-gen formats in the wild.
I’m a dev and webp is incredible. Don’t really understand the hate - it’s a libre format that is lighyears ahead of png or jpg in every measurable metric. The lack of support is entirely on app developers and their incompetence not the format.
The other formats like jpeg xl are only catching up now when webp was out for 14 years already.
It’s a bunch of old men yelling at clouds is what it is. WebP is fucking amazing
JXL for the win! when will we get support for it in firefox though…
Everyone should use jxl for their photos
This JPEG is just 41 KiB, which was the style shortly after I was born.
Excuse me, I forgot the text. Wouldn’t be fair without all that entropy. To make up for it, I turned on chroma subsampling. This one is 39 KiB.
To be more accurate, the dithering was more specific to animated gifs and not static pictures. Unless you go back really far… I remember finding porn on 5 inch floppies my dad had in his closet and even the non-animated images were black & white and dithered to hell. Though I am pretty sure he didn’t obtain those off the internet.
Dithered Street Fighter porn?
how small can u get this with the text still readable?
Depends on what you consider readable, but I got it down to 2842 bytes by downscaling it and using an absolutely atrocious quality setting:
That’s just small enough to fit inside a QR code, so I did that! (You probably can’t scan it with a typical QR reader; you need something like zbar that supports reading binary data).
deleted by creator
nice :D
in a different timeline where the GIF89 specification would not have been mostly ignored, it would have been possible to go even smaller.
“The GIF89 specification allows you to specify text captions to be overlayed on the following image. This feature never took off; browsers and image-processing applications such as Photoshop ignore it”
Meaning if your gif viewing client supports full GIF89 then you could just display the text over a 1x1 pixel image, shrinking the file size down to something in the range of < 100bytes.
In that vein, I’d be interested to see if someone could Inkscape it into an SVG with embedded text.
Though I have no idea how many vectors would be needed to make the image similar enough.
The SVG send me down a rabid hole, apparently SVG embedded text is actually selectable and all, this is basically what gif tryed to do and failed lol
but sadly lemmy dosent seem to let upload .svg :/
At that point you might as well just send it as text.
But the artifacts!
I turned on chroma subsampling
43KiB, though obviously a chunk of that is from the colors of the jpg Professor.
EDIT: I just noticed webp messes with colors around the edges too (which would matter more if I cut the resolution in half or so). The original .png (what I actually uploaded) doesn’t at 51.6KiB.
Also obviously this would be less data in non-pixel format (well, it’d likely be eaten up by overhead for packaging, though after that it would allow tons of art for negligible data cost). Would be smaller as an svg for example (or an swf).
_
Avif, without alpha channel, 17.6 KB
We listened to music as 41kB RealAudio files that sounded like the song was underwater, which was the style at the time.
Fyi, dithering hinders most modern compression algorythms, making the pic bigger.
This.exe file including music and visuals is 4KB
What about 256 byte executables? That’s a 16th of 4KB!
Oooh now we’re getting into drive formatting choices and filesystem quirks!
I miss dithering. It’s got a certain je ne sais quoi.
Mmh, diffuse dither … give me some Bayer dither!
