#JPEGMINI IMAGES BLURRY ON MOBILE SOFTWARE#
#JPEGMINI IMAGES BLURRY ON MOBILE CODE#
#JPEGMINI IMAGES BLURRY ON MOBILE FREE#

I liked RIOT very much but I wish it showed which external tools it uses besides the PNG ones. Hopefully being open source means others will step up with with cool new ideas. I'm sure there are a ton of optimizations to be made, but to be totally honest my math and C programming skills are not the best. if it's a picture of clouds then lower the quality slightly and if it's an intricate building then increase the quality a bit. One thing I would like to add is some measure of overall image complexity, e.g. what's the average pixel value, how do the pixels vary, what's the relationship between the original variance and the reference block variance, etc. The algorithm I use is SSIM, which works by measuring relationships between pixels in 8x8 blocks, e.g.

#JPEGMINI IMAGES BLURRY ON MOBILE CODE#

I haven't read the patents (and won't due to possibly tainting my own code with information from them). JPEGmini actually uses some custom patented algorithm for perceived image quality. That's much better than throwing away too much. Luckily it errs on the side of caution and throws away less data than JPEGmini. I think the groups of solid colors are problematic.

#JPEGMINI IMAGES BLURRY ON MOBILE FREE#

It definitely doesn't look great, and depending on the image subject matter you might find this is too much compression, but it's something to consider if your site visitors will be on older mobiles or in remote/developing countries.Thanks! Feel free to contribute the bat file if you think it'll be useful for others. If your customers are on a slow internet connection, you might even consider going for the seemingly ridiculous 15% quality on the far right, which reduces the file size to a meagre 1/3 of the original.

NOTE: I have added the clickable lightbox functionality just so you can see the actual original image file larger to inspect it more closely - I wouldn't recommend using the highly compressed 30% image if your viewers would be able to see the image in this manner.

This would be fine as long as the image is used in the small size shown.

You can just about see the pixellation happening in the blurry grass background, but I'd argue it's acceptable, especially when you consider the file size is nearly 1/2. The difference between the left 70% and the middle 30% quality image is hardly noticeable. This next section shows how you can get away with lower % quality for images used at small sizes.įor a large image, I'd recommend something like this 70% JPEGmini as the right balance between quality and file size: Size is everything - how the size of the image on the page changes things However, if you're just using pictures for standard purposes and you don't really need super-high quality images, then you can actually get away with a much lower % quality - at which point the benefit of JPEGmini decreases. This will give you the best balance of quality/file size. If you are a photographer or otherwise using images on your website for a purpose requiring maximum quality, you should consider exporting from Photoshop or Preview at 75% or higher quality, and then using JPEGmini to squeeze down your file sizes. If not, Preview does a perfectly good job. If you have Photoshop, it does a slightly better job of compressing images than Preview, so ideally use Photoshop.

#JPEGMINI IMAGES BLURRY ON MOBILE SOFTWARE#

PHOTOSHOP: 100% image quality, without and with JPEGmini:Įvery software application has a slightly different method of compressing images. In each set of images, you can click on the image to view a larger version of the image in a lightbox for easy comparison. Comparing the effects of Photoshop, Preview & JPEGmini on different image qualities It also shows how you can lower the % quality when the images occupy a smaller space on the page, without it really being too noticeable. Furthermore, it shows the effects of using the JPEGmini tool to reduce file sizes without reducing the visual quality to the naked eye. This page shows the effects of using Photoshop or Preview to save JPEGs at various % quality, to show how the two programs compress images differently. The purpose of this page is to demonstrate and help determine what is the lowest % quality you can get away with for images on websites, to ensure the lowest possible file size without compromising on overall appearance. Determining what % quality JPEG to use on web pagesĪnd how best to reduce/compress your image files

Jpegmini images blurry on mobile