Re: optimizing PNGs
On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 11:04:22AM -0700, Don Armstrong wrote:
> On Wed, 29 May 2013, Bastien ROUCARIES wrote:
> > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Bastien ROUCARIES
> > <roucaries.bastien@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > not sure about svgz... On a typical svg file:
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 452K mai 28 18:48 display-im6.svg
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 103K mai 28 18:48 display-im6.svg.gz
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 297K mai 29 09:42 optimised.svg
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 81K mai 29 09:43 optimised.svg.gz
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 289K mai 29 09:50 scour.svg
> > > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 90K mai 29 09:51 scour.svg.gz
> >
> > With a lossy (decimal truncation to 3) the saving are even more important:
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 234K mai 29 09:52 scour.svg
> > -rw-r--r-- 1 bastien bastien 54K mai 29 09:53 scour.svg.gz
>
> Right. So SVGZ is smaller than just scour, and both is smaller than just
> SVGZ by about 10-20% unless you do a lossy conversion.
You forgot to put that SVGZ file through advdef or zopfli :p Deflate
compression again.
--
ᛊᚨᚾᛁᛏᚣ᛫ᛁᛊ᛫ᚠᛟᚱ᛫ᚦᛖ᛫ᚹᛖᚨᚲ
Reply to: