[Bf-webcontent] site optimizations and speeding it up

[Peter Carrero]

Hi, i think we have to be careful when switching from JPG to PNG wholesale.
PNGs are beautiful in their lossless 24-bit depth (or 32, if you add the
alpha channel), but they tend to be considerably larger than their png
equivalent.

taking the 2 images referenced, the larger jpg image is at a dimension of
4096px by 1714px, IOW: over 7 million pixels, with a download size of
1.7MB, while the smaller png image had a dimension of 1200px by 600px, or
720 thousand pixels, with a size of over 800KB.

So, with a little math, we get that the larger JPG image was providing us
about 4.13 pixels per every byte of payload while the smaller PNG image
gave us only 0.9 pixels per byte. this is almost a 5-to-1 ratio benefiting
the JPG format.

And that is without tweaking the compression of the JPG image, with a
quality of 80 would provide 47% of savings, with a file size of 893KB.

--
Peter Carrero
"non sibi, sed civitas"
--
"Loyalty and devotion lead to bravery. Bravery leads to the spirit of
self-sacrifice. The spirit of self-sacrifice creates trust in the power of
love."
– Morihei Ueshiba
--
"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it
works.”
– Steve Jobs


On Sat, Sep 21, 2013 at 2:24 PM, Daniel Schalla <d.schalla at be-untitled.eu>wrote:

> I join Scott there, would also love to help on these things out.
>
> Would recommend switching the .jpg to .png and use an PNG Optimizer
> (have to check the link when at home)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bf-webcontent mailing list
> Bf-webcontent at blender.org
> http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-webcontent
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.blender.org/pipermail/bf-webcontent/attachments/20130922/971e227c/attachment.html>