Fediverse memes

1314 readers

32 users here now

Memes about the Fediverse.

Rules

General

Be respectful
Post on topic
No bigotry or hate speech

Specific

We are not YPTB. If you have a problem with the way an instance or community is run, then take it up over at !yepowertrippinbastards@lemmy.dbzer0.com.
- Addendum: Yes we know that you think ml/hexbear/grad are tankies and or .world are a bunch of liberals but it gets old quickly. Try and come up with new material.

Elsewhere in the Fediverse

Other relevant communities:

founded 7 months ago

MODERATORS

BoozeOrWater@feddit.uk

flamingos@feddit.uk

Emperor@feddit.uk

198

We Need to Save The Bytes (lemmy.ca)

submitted 2 months ago by Sunshine to c/fedimemes@feddit.uk

48 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SatyrSack@feddit.org 9 points 2 months ago (2 children)

In my limited testing, exporting as a JPG can sometimes lead to a smaller file size than exporting to WEBP. Not always. I'm not sure if there is just some "point of diminishing returns" or whatever where JPG actually becomes more efficient or what.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

WebP can be either lossless or lossy. These two modes achieve objectively better compression than PNG or JPEG, respectively. Obviously, you need to pay attention to the settings to get the best file size for your use case.

[–] weker01@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 months ago (1 children)

That is actually something I really dislike. Lossless and lossy formats should be immediately distinguishable.

[–] ChaoticNeutralCzech@feddit.org 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

What if I told you JPEG can be lossless too? By dialing the quality to 100% and using the rare setting of 4:4:4 RGB to prevent loss through colorspace conversion, you can create JPEG files that store any 8bit picture losslessly. It will be larger than a BMP for some of them but that is correct for any lossless format.

[–] The_Decryptor@aussie.zone 2 points 2 months ago

I’m not sure if there is just some “point of diminishing returns” or whatever where JPG actually becomes more efficient or what.

There is, but it's at high quality levels. If you're using WebP for thumbnails or other lower quality situations (Which was the original intended use) then WebP will give you better quality than JPEG for a given filesize.

For lossless uses it's even better, the format is much more limited than PNG, but in the common cases it beats it.