Notice: You have been identified as a bot, so no internal UID will be assigned to you. If you are a real person messing with your useragent, you should change it back to something normal.

Minichan

Topic: HEY: fuckalms

S. Squeegington III started this discussion 1 week ago #64,058

what's the best way to optimize photos for the web? the photos are all taken with ipads and people's phones and stuff and i've just got all of the raw images. they're all like 1.5 meg and there's a bunch of them and i need to put them all onto the same damn page and i can't really do thumbnails because it's super old software and it wants to do image galleries and so it's wanting to like fully load each picture and it'll end up taking forever for the page to load if i don't somehow compress them.

pretty sure they're all just jpegs.

Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 7 minutes later[^] [v] #798,499

imagemagick, convert to png with desired quality level. optionally use pngout to further optimize the pngs

(Edited 43 seconds later.)

Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 6 minutes later, 14 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #798,501

Ask the little pedo cunt on Tincyhan, don't encourage him to start posting over here

S. Squeegington III (OP) replied with this 1 week ago, 7 minutes later, 21 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #798,502

@798,499 (B)
> It is sometimes convenient to resize an image as they are read. Suppose you have hundreds of large JPEG images you want to convert to a sequence of >PNG thumbails:
>
> magick '*.jpg' -resize 120x120 thumbnail%03d.png
>
> Here all the images are read and subsequently resized. It is faster and less resource intensive to resize each image it is read:
>
> magick '*.jpg[120x120]' thumbnail%03d.png

neat. i think this might be exactly what i need.

Big Daddy Derek !Uvm54ORbmo joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 8 minutes later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #798,504

@OP
Photograph the screen with your smartphone and save as jpeg.

FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI joined in and replied with this 1 week ago, 11 minutes later, 41 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #798,507

@798,499 (B)
terrible, terrible advice. never convert photographs to png. ever.

@798,501 (C)
Nice madpost. Have you checked your blood pressure lately?

@OP
You could do imagemagick if you want but don't do pngs from jpegs.
Alternatively, you can use irfanview to optimize the encoding tables used and make them progressive, which will reduce the size without altering the quality. I would also recommend getting EXIFtoolGUI and removing the EXIF IFD1 and/or Photoshop thumbnails since they add bloat and have no purpose for online viewing.

(Edited 12 seconds later.)

Anonymous B replied with this 1 week ago, 18 minutes later, 59 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #798,509

@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
nobody gives a shit about quality that much

S. Squeegington III (OP) replied with this 1 week ago, 56 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #798,514

@previous (B)
actually i need to retain as much quality as possible. but, you know, the images are all very large since they are these huge cell phone pics so i can reduce them in size and probably keep a lot of quality, i just don't know what method gives the best results. and anything i can do to optimize them the better, ultimately i'll be scaling this procedure up for work purposes and need to store all of this on the cloud and have it all display quickly with a small storage footprint. and i can't sacrifice as much quality as i'd like. so yeah, optimizing the whatsit tables and ganking the exif bloat is probably a good idea too.

and to be able to do a huge batch of them at once also sounds pretty nice.

S. Squeegington III (OP) double-posted this 1 week ago, 16 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #798,517

@798,507 (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)

> terrible, terrible advice. never convert photographs to png. ever.
>
>
> Nice madpost. Have you checked your blood pressure lately?
>
>
> You could do imagemagick if you want but don't do pngs from jpegs.
> Alternatively, you can use irfanview to optimize the encoding tables used and make them progressive, which will reduce the size without altering the quality. I would also recommend getting EXIFtoolGUI and removing the EXIF IFD1 and/or Photoshop thumbnails since they add bloat and have no purpose for online viewing.

got it. so just keep them as jpegs and resize them i guess? what is a "sane" size for an online image? if i have to have like 60 of them on a page or something...?

FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI replied with this 1 week ago, 3 hours later, 6 hours after the original post[^] [v] #798,544

@previous (S. Squeegington III)
"sane size" for web depends on how they'll be displayed and whether you'll be using thumbnails that link to full images or just shrinking the full image to a specified size.
If you're going with thumbnails, then the full images should probably be 1600px or 1920px. The thumbnails should probably be 320px if they'll be accessed on those retina Macs or cell phones, otherwise 240px should be fine for normal screens.

If you're going to soft-scale the images, I'd recommend 1280px or 1024px.

If you don't care about preserving any metadata at all* you can skip EXIFtoolGUI and just check the box for 'Clean all APP markers' in IrfanView. Or you could just look up ScriptJPG which will do a better job, but it doesn't preserve file modification dates (you should definitely use it on thumbnails in any case since they should not contain metadata).

*Disclaimer: some people get super pissed off when you suggest wiping out all metadata because it can contain copyright info, of course most highly-trafficked sites already do this as a matter of protecting user security, so you can go either way.

(Edited 2 minutes later.)

S. Squeegington III (OP) replied with this 1 week ago, 10 hours later, 16 hours after the original post[^] [v] #798,564

@previous (FuckAlms !vX8K53rFBI)
cool, thanks for the suggestions. i'm trying to get a job done fast and dirty, i could spend days doing custom layouts with thumbnails and nice site design but we're supposed to be moving on to an entirely new backend for our web hosting and everything and it's all like integrated and fancy and automated and all we'll have to do is upload pics and spreadsheets as far as maintenance is concerned but until that all gets configured and finally integrated to the rest of our infrastructure (not my job) we're having to support our old website and its what's being reworked (somehow my job). it hasn't been changed since february, actually, so some out of date pages were just kinda lingering... but the web integration is very behind imho. i guess others don't seem to be concerned about how long it's taking, but i think we're like 3 months behind schedule or more. not sure when that'll be ready... not my job, as has been stressed to me.

so. i had to take down a couple of pages and publish some new ones and i really hate this old software that's being used. the image gallery plugin it uses is terrible, it's all very web 1.0 and sucky, and it's slow and shit. i just want to be done using it. if i can just slim down the pics then everything will load reasonably quickly and i won't have to spend any time creating a thumbnail gallery like a sane person might.

i delayed posting this because it occurs to me that i might be better off starting over with wordpress or something. just redo the whole thing and keep the same basic layout and theme and all. the site layout isn't complicated, i could probably replicate it in wordpress in... like a few hours. that might be easier than having to go back into this web.0 bullshit basicbuilder website tool. WYSIWYG my asshole, what you see is half an afternoon's work vaporize because your retard galleries become unclickable and won't fucking update and crashes the whole fucking plugin on the editor side you cocksucking autosaving errors fuck face.
:
[upload]

Please familiarise yourself with the rules and markup syntax before posting, also keep in mind you can minify URLs using MiniURL and generate image macros using MiniMacro.