Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: How much can this jpeg be compressed ( smallest) yet retains good image

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    265
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    How much can this jpeg be compressed ( smallest) yet retains good image

    Hi :

    How much can you reduce attached jpeg ( present size 13501 bytes ?
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	shopping.jpg 
Views:	72 
Size:	13.2 KB 
ID:	7061  
    Last edited by LawCounsels; 14th November 2019 at 00:22.

  2. #2
    Administrator Shelwien's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kharkov, Ukraine
    Posts
    3,977
    Thanks
    296
    Thanked 1,304 Times in 740 Posts
    1. Please reupload your image in an archive.
    As it is, the size of attached file is 13501, while the size of file saved by chrome is 5589, so it gets confusing.

    2. Are you asking about lossy (reduce size of jpeg file) or lossless (get a smaller archive from which the same jpeg can be extracted) or both?

  3. Thanks:

    Krishty (14th November 2019)

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    265
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Attach Archive

    Best good quality lossy , also lossless
    Attached Files Attached Files

  5. #4
    Administrator Shelwien's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kharkov, Ukraine
    Posts
    3,977
    Thanks
    296
    Thanked 1,304 Times in 740 Posts
    Well, in the end its up to what you'd consider acceptable.
    I tested:
    1) jpegtran -copy none / progressive / arithmetic (your file contains some metainfo)
    2) guetzli (2*)
    3) imagemagick re-encoding (3*)
    4) paq8px = the best lossless jpeg recompressor
    Code:
    13,501 shopping.jpg
    12,696 shopping_a.jpg         // jpegtran -copy none -arithmetic
    12,521 shopping_pa.jpg        // jpegtran -copy none -progressive -arithmetic
    11,073 shopping.jpg.paq8px183 // -7
     9,065 2.jpg                  // guetzli_windows_x86-64.exe --quality 0 --nomemlimit shopping.jpg 2.jpg
     8,674 2_a.jpg        
     8,490 2_pa.jpg       
     7,738 2.jpg.paq8px183
     3,348 3q10.jpg               // convert -quality 10 shopping.jpg 3.jpg
     2,698 3q10.jpg.paq8px183
    - 3q1.jpg is 1173 bytes, but its already too hard to recognize
    - 3q46.jpg is 10674 bytes, so no point in going higher

    Also there's this: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/...ding-challenge
    but it doesn't properly apply to pictures that start as jpeg, because jpeg artifacts hurt compression of other algorithms.
    Attached Files Attached Files
    • File Type: rar 1.rar (313.6 KB, 33 views)

  6. #5
    Member nikkho's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Spain
    Posts
    554
    Thanks
    223
    Thanked 166 Times in 107 Posts
    13163 bytes using FileOptimizer
    ​12408 bytes using FileOptimizer enabling arith coding.

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    88
    Thanks
    55
    Thanked 41 Times in 25 Posts
    13145 bytes using Papa’s Best Optimizer (no arithmetic coding; removing all metadata).

  8. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    876
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 325 Times in 198 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Shelwien View Post
    Also there's this: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/...ding-challenge
    but it doesn't properly apply to pictures that start as jpeg, because jpeg artifacts hurt compression of other algorithms.
    Even though such extreme compression is a special use case, JPEG XL does surprisingly well. One of the specialized contestants (img2twit) on the left, JPEG XL on the right at 347 bytes.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	monaz.png 
Views:	153 
Size:	103.5 KB 
ID:	7064Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mona.png 
Views:	182 
Size:	97.5 KB 
ID:	7065

  9. Thanks (6):

    Cyan (14th November 2019),hexagone (15th November 2019),introspec (15th November 2019),JamesWasil (16th November 2019),Krishty (14th November 2019),Shelwien (14th November 2019)

  10. #8
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    82
    Thanks
    64
    Thanked 33 Times in 21 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jyrki Alakuijala View Post
    (img2twit) on the left, JPEG XL on the right at 347 bytes.
    While really appreciating the technical achievement here, I wish she did not look like a bearded man quite so much!

  11. Thanks:

    JamesWasil (16th November 2019)

  12. #9
    Member JamesWasil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Location
    Arizona
    Posts
    103
    Thanks
    96
    Thanked 18 Times in 17 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by introspec View Post
    While really appreciating the technical achievement here, I wish she did not look like a bearded man quite so much!
    It looks like Chaz Bono wins the internet for having an avatar that is only 347 bytes.

    It doesn't look like Mona Lisa at all anymore, but they're still kinda famous? Famous-ish

  13. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    200
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
    Still acceptable? :
    4522 bytes
    4187 bytes Arith JPG
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	shopping.jpg 
Views:	54 
Size:	4.4 KB 
ID:	7067  
    Attached Images Attached Images

  14. #11
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    London
    Posts
    265
    Thanks
    13
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by necros View Post
    Still acceptable? :
    4522 bytes
    4187 bytes Arith JPG
    .... but not great ( in zip archive posted each individual petals look crisp fresh distinct clear )

    How was it reduced ?

  15. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    876
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 325 Times in 198 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by introspec View Post
    While really appreciating the technical achievement here, I wish she did not look like a bearded man quite so much!
    Yes. Practical applications start at 2000 bytes. (One image is worth 1000 WORDs.)

  16. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Location
    indonesia
    Posts
    343
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 62 Times in 50 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Jyrki Alakuijala View Post
    Yes. Practical applications start at 2000 bytes. (One image is worth 1000 WORDs.)
    Yes I agree

  17. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Yugoslavia
    Posts
    62
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
    but for twitter challenge, perhaps some other image samples would be more appropriate, *cough* goatse *cough*

  18. #15
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    france
    Posts
    72
    Thanks
    8
    Thanked 39 Times in 29 Posts
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	monaz.png 
Views:	153 
Size:	103.5 KB 
ID:	7064Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mona.png 
Views:	182 
Size:	97.5 KB 
ID:	7065Click image for larger version. 

Name:	download.png 
Views:	107 
Size:	64.6 KB 
ID:	7075

    + WebP v2 on the right - 254bytes.
    ​ paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.02831
    Last edited by skal; 19th November 2019 at 08:50.

  19. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    91
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by skal View Post
    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	monaz.png 
Views:	153 
Size:	103.5 KB 
ID:	7064Click image for larger version. 

Name:	mona.png 
Views:	182 
Size:	97.5 KB 
ID:	7065Click image for larger version. 

Name:	download.png 
Views:	107 
Size:	64.6 KB 
ID:	7075

    + WebP v2 - 254bytes- on the right.
    ​ paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1812.02831
    just wow.

  20. #17
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Poland
    Posts
    91
    Thanks
    9
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by LawCounsels View Post
    Attach Archive

    Best good quality lossy , also lossless
    Tried JPEG XL:


    Output siże: 11667 bytes
    https://google.github.io/brunsli/
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Capture.PNG 
Views:	57 
Size:	5.1 KB 
ID:	7083  

  21. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    200
    Thanks
    136
    Thanked 13 Times in 12 Posts
    Hmm is there any win jpg > jpg xl utility? Or can we make https://google.github.io/brunsli/ for offline use?

  22. #19
    Administrator Shelwien's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kharkov, Ukraine
    Posts
    3,977
    Thanks
    296
    Thanked 1,304 Times in 740 Posts
    Its not quite like what they say.
    Brunsli is google's jpeg recompressor: https://github.com/google/brunsli
    It may be considered for jpeg XL integration, but atm brunsli is a standalone codec.

  23. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2015
    Location
    Switzerland
    Posts
    876
    Thanks
    242
    Thanked 325 Times in 198 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by necros View Post
    Hmm is there any win jpg > jpg xl utility? Or can we make https://google.github.io/brunsli/ for offline use?
    There is no jpeg to jpeg xl conversion available right now. Usually we get 22 % gains with brunsli and 60–65 % with jpeg xl (with a similar manually verified or multi p-norm over the butteraugli field).

    Brunsli is specified as a requirement in jpeg xl candidate draft.

Similar Threads

  1. Smallest LZMA Decompressor
    By comp1 in forum Download Area
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 9th October 2018, 05:22
  2. JPEG Test image set made available
    By thorfdbg in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 10th December 2015, 21:06
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 3rd December 2015, 12:30
  4. Quo Vadis JPEG - New Movements in Still Image Compression
    By thorfdbg in forum Data Compression
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 14th June 2012, 20:47
  5. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 30th June 2007, 16:49

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •