• @brown567
    link
    English
    17229 days ago

    The compression artifacts (from converting B/W line art to jpg) being printed on the page have given me a new pet peeve

    • androogee (they/she)
      link
      fedilink
      English
      49
      edit-2
      29 days ago

      Now imagine these corrupted images being engraved into stone or steel by machine. Turned into literal artifacts for future generations to ponder over.

      • “The intentional grey diamonds, you see this was a highly advanced society capable of high definition videos and images, represents a loving fealty to that which is complete or known. The imperfections in the art represent an acknowledgement of their societal short falls. This will be on the exam by the way.”

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          2029 days ago

          "There is much debate about how aware the primitive minds were of the degradation of their information. Did they believe older things looked worse when they were photographed or did they understand it was their photographs themselves that got worse over time?

          Even more surprising is that their oldest media wasn’t even able to maintain any information at all about colour."

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1029 days ago

      Jpg for photos, png for everything else.

      It’s an easy rule of thumb, it hurts that 20 years of repeating it seems to have had zero effect.

      Maybe this helps: Jpg fucks up your image, and png doesn’t.

      Or: jpg is lossy, png is lossless.

      Or: It’s better to save photos as png than cartoons as jpg.

      Seriously, I hope some of this breaks through because deep fried images are so fucking unnecessary.

      • LostXOR
        link
        fedilink
        228 days ago

        I hear WebP can often offer much better compression than PNG in lossless mode so that could be an alternative.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1
          edit-2
          24 days ago

          Could be. I’m not as familiar with that format – a major strength of png is that anything can open and view it properly. It’s been a standard for decades, so it has universal compatibility.

          e: I’m not going to look into that specific format (I stopped caring about the inner workings of file formats like 15 years ago when I stopped getting paid to care), but I think I could bet you that webp is a document hierarchy wrapper on png, jpg, gif, mpeg, etc, ad inf.

          I had to exit this comment and look again because I couldn’t remember if you’d said webm or webx or webp or whatever. The last I knew, that’s not a file format but a codepage (nowadays, that’s usually a cheap wrapper over code they found and repackaged).

          That’s massively simplified, but if you’re asking that in this thread, I’m worried people are being sold a difference that doesn’t exist.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          29 days ago

          Slightly larger file size, which mattered in like 2002, but it’s only a few mb, which doesn’t matter at all now.

          e: if you’re a professional photographer and saving stupidly high resolution images by the thousands, you’ll want to use jpg, but in that case, you’ll understand why.