Busy — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 20:57:52 +0000

PSP is up to v9 ? dang, sorry I only have 5 & 6 - anyone with PSP9 able to tell us if there is an option on saving to remove image data (EXIF etc)

I always spell irfanview wrong, the website is http://www.irfanview.com/

rtroxel — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 10:25:06 +0000

What version of PSP you got?

I have version 9, but I'll check out irfanview also.

Busy — Tue, 07 Nov 2006 09:45:38 +0000

What version of PSP you got?
I don't find PSP (5 and 6) the best thing to compress images, i use psp to add url's to images but always open and resave in irfanview to compress

I just use ifranview to resample, resize, lighten ... (and remove EXIF), has option on save.

rtroxel — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 22:00:30 +0000

If you are dealing with digital photos make sure you are removing the EXIF (cameras information).

Can you do that with Paint Shop Pro? If not, how?

Thanks again.

Busy — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 21:50:21 +0000

Ideally you want to resample the images rather than resize.
If you are dealing with digital photos make sure you are removing the EXIF (cameras information).

an example: A 1.2mb camera image, saved at 99dbi and just removing the EXIF will take the image to 300kb. a lot depends on the image itself, how many colours etc so results may vary.

rtroxel — Mon, 06 Nov 2006 21:39:06 +0000

Has anyone here used Pegasus or WinSoft Advanced JPEG Compressor?

I've downloaded demo copies of both, and I'm leaning toward the WinSoft. However, I'd like to hear from someone with experience. My two web sites need photos to be compressed, so I can bring the overall page size down to about 40k. I'd like the photo sizes to remain 400x300, at 72dpi.

I'm using Paint Shop Pro to size the photos - some of them scanned, some from a digital camera.

Thanks,

Roo — Sat, 24 Dec 2005 03:16:32 +0000

The original quesion did not ask specifically about jpeg compression.

The original post:

The best way to compress photos

Quote: I want to get highest quality from small file size. Which format is the best for pictures? Is it still JPEG or maybe there is something new?

What software I should to use to get best quality with small file size?

lex — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 20:38:30 +0000

Wow!

War Of The
FORMATS

demonhale — Sat, 17 Dec 2005 14:06:10 +0000

JeevesBond wrote: Right, so you got a 15% reduction, that's not much and is not a typical method for reducing JPEG file size.

This effect is to be expected when removing data from an image, but is not the way in which JPEG compression works!

I've read most of: http://www.hpl.hp.com/loco/HPL-98-193R1.pdf the LOCO-I JPEG Compression Algorithm Specification and, although I don't profess to understand much - it seems that JPEG reduces the number of bits required to describe a particular pixel within an image by refining the possible values allowed, this process being: Quantization. These lossy algorithms will not really be helped by manual colour depth reduction, in fact it's probably better to let the algorithm decide how to do this using it's own predictive methods.

demonhale, your information is flawed, you can of course reduce the amount of space required to display an image by reducing the colour depth but this has no relation to the JPEG compression algorithm.

Please stop confusing the issue by typing before thinking!

With all due respect mr bond I never said its part of the compression algorithm of jpegs, but you could "reduce the number of colors used" ; it still uses the same bit depth although it fairly reduced the file size, as I said if you want to squeeze more juice. Its fairly useless as 15% in a big image, but then how about if I use smaller images and a 4kb file becomes just 3kb, it would be enough of a reduction for me without affecting the quality of the pic...

Not far from a suggestion to the original question of this thread, he specifically asked how he can do this with a JPEG not a GIF not a PNG...

I know a lot of tricks for GIF, ill give them if that was the question for this thread...

DaveyBoy — Fri, 16 Dec 2005 18:21:54 +0000

timjpriebe wrote: You know, I've found the best way to compress photos is to fold them in half, then in half again. They then fit neatly in smaller pockets than they would otherwise.

(Sorry, I've been holding that back since this thread was originally posted.)

Very poor, mate!