I understand that reducing the quality is like zipping the file – only that you are not able to get the original file back. See my notes on Compression http: Disabling colour subsampling also save a lot of space, for very little loss of quality. Can you spot the difference between these three images? What is compressed when I use lesser quality? No chroma subsampling https: Since I had not set the correct filename yet, I opened the picture again later and stored under another name.
|License:||For Personal Use Only|
|iPhone 5, 5S resolutions||640×1136|
|iPhone 6, 6S resolutions||750×1334|
|iPhone 7, 7 Plus, 8, 8 Plus resolutions||1080×1920|
|Android Mobiles HD resolutions||360×640, 540×960, 720×1280|
|Android Mobiles Full HD resolutions||1080×1920|
|Mobiles HD resolutions||480×800, 768×1280|
|Mobiles QHD, iPhone X resolutions||1440×2560|
|HD resolutions||1280×720, 1366×768, 1600×900, 1920×1080, 2560×1440, Original|
IrfanView (bit) – geben Sie Download- und Software-Berichte frei – CNET
What happens to the file when a storage with “quality 80” and no tick in “disable color subsampling ie, use 1×1 “? No chroma subsampling https: Now the picture has the file size kB. Unfortunately I found nowhere the indication, which is exactly the cause of the file size reduction. Let me try this You wrote that using higher percentage of Quality and using chroma subsampling will result in saving space. Ich habe mir ein Bild vom Internet heruntergeladen und als Jpeg abgespeichert.
Photos that are just landscapes or seascapes will have even fewer artefacts at high compression settings. I downloaded a picture from the Internet and saved as jpeg.
It “breaks the image into 2×2 pixel blocks and only stores the average color information for each 2×2 pixel group” This means I only have a quarter of the colors of the original file. But how is this technically possible when the resolution, current size and so on stays the same? Where does the programm take something away so that the data amount decreases?
That could explain the different numbers in “number of unique colors” I have. Obviously some JPG artefacts are added, but only a close examination will spot the difference.
What is compressed when I use lesser quality? Hello Bhikkhu Pesala, thank you once again for your time and your help. I understand that reducing the quality is like zipping the file – only that you are not able to get the original file back.
Remains the part with the quality: Hello Bhikkhu Pesala, thank you very much for your response.
IrfanView PlugIns (64 Bit)
Since I had not set the correct filename yet, I opened the picture again later and stored under another name. I have a question regarding the image quality soeichert using IrfanView, specifically in the following case: The reason for the reduction of the file size is that the setting “Quality 80” and no “Disable color subsampling” ie 1×1 use was set when saving.
Can irfqnview spot the difference between these three images? See my notes on Compression http: Interestingly, the “Resolution”, “Original size”, “Current size”, “Print size from DPI “, “Original colors”, “Current colors” and “Required RAM memory” “The first line” information ” is exactly the same, but the “number of unique colors” and “required disk space “are different, so my question is: JPG compression is very efficient.
The image has a file size of 5.
The original PNG image is Digital Image File Types Explained http: It irrfanview say why the file size gets smaller how is the smaller file size achieved? One part orf my question is answered.
I tried this and compared the information data of the files – still the same numbers except for “number of unique colors” and “required disk space”.
I intentionally chose an area of the picture with text, as areas with high contrast shows the most obvious JPG artefacts. A search at the help of IrfanView and at Google brought the results that reduces the file size when using this setting. Disabling colour subsampling also save a lot of space, for very little loss of quality.