You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Yes, one can understand when a picture is huge (in pixels or megabytes) and it is resized and re-compressed in WebP. WebP is a good format. But why to compress lossy, if the original picture arrives already in WebP and weighs less than the result? The same applies to JPEG, but for some reason does not affect PNG, while it can always be compressed in WebP without loss, getting a benefit in size.
It would be good to add minimal input format checking and not to take unnecessary actions if they will knowingly degrade the image but not give a gain in size.
Motivation
This will make life easier for authors who understand and use compression correctly, as well as for subscribers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Pitch
Yes, one can understand when a picture is huge (in pixels or megabytes) and it is resized and re-compressed in WebP. WebP is a good format. But why to compress lossy, if the original picture arrives already in WebP and weighs less than the result? The same applies to JPEG, but for some reason does not affect PNG, while it can always be compressed in WebP without loss, getting a benefit in size.
It would be good to add minimal input format checking and not to take unnecessary actions if they will knowingly degrade the image but not give a gain in size.
Motivation
This will make life easier for authors who understand and use compression correctly, as well as for subscribers.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: