[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       imagemagick-user
Subject:    Re: [magick-users] jpg quality question with imagemagick and Gimp
From:       blau <blaumeer () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-09-14 14:39:56
Message-ID: 4C8F893C.8060200 () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On 14/09/2010 15:59, Bob Meetin wrote:
> Adding -strip seemed to be the biggest gain.

Yes

> If you're using the image on the internet, somewhere between 70-80% 
> quality is typically 'good enough' in my opinion.  

Yes, on the web, 80-85% is a good tradeoff for quality and loading speed
imho.  At least on the pages I am working now.

> 216774 jensen.jpg
> 165523 jensen-strip.jpg
> 75167  jensen-s600.jpg
> 35269  jensen-s600-strip.jpg
> 3005   jensen-s600-strip-q1.jpg
> 6124   jensen-s600-strip-q10.jpg
> 9927   jensen-s600-strip-q20.jpg
> 13280  jensen-s600-strip-q30.jpg
> 15998  jensen-s600-strip-q40.jpg
> 18751  jensen-s600-strip-q50.jpg
> 21787  jensen-s600-strip-q60.jpg
> 26459  jensen-s600-strip-q70.jpg
> 29416  jensen-s600-strip-q75.jpg
> 33943  jensen-s600-strip-q80.jpg
> 40697  jensen-s600-strip-q85-d24.jpg
> 40665  jensen-s600-strip-q85-d8.jpg
> 40697  jensen-s600-strip-q85.jpg
> 52159  jensen-s600-strip-q90.jpg
> 77718  jensen-s600-strip-q95.jpg
> 183633 jensen-s600-strip-q100.jpg

I'll keep this list for future reference :-)

> -q 1 has the effect of a mind altering experience!

Very fun indeed!

blau
_______________________________________________
Magick-users mailing list
Magick-users@imagemagick.org
http://studio.imagemagick.org/mailman/listinfo/magick-users
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]