Why is everyone using massive PNG files for their shots?

Eric Chadwick

Am I the only one who hates waiting for these massive 8mb PNGs to download? I'm using 15mbps, so that's certainly an average net speed, not slow. Peoples' image servers seem to be the gating factor here.

Do people just not care about how their work gets passed over? Why wait for the d/l if the OP doesn't care enough to be considerate to their viewers? 

Sure, save your originals as PNG. But when you're posting online, please compress. JPG at 7 or 8 looks great, and downloads real quick.

</rant>

mr_

exactly the same rant as we did here: http://polycount.com/discussion/comment/2369168/#Comment_2369168

I rather download porn just to wait 20 minutes to download an image...  

lotet

haha, I was thinking the exact same thing, like didnt we have this exact thread a while back? well I guess giant PNGs is something that never changes, like war...war never changes...

rebb

I approve of this message.
It seems to become more of a thing elsewhere too, like Reddit threads full of 1080p gfycat "videos" where a small one would convey the exact same message.

beefaroni

Yep, it's super frustrating. I wish there was a way to implement a 500kb or 1mb cap on images. Or a forum feature not to load images more than "x" MB.

AtticusMars

Yeah... I was going to ask when the new WAYWO thread gets made if the top level post could ask people not to post PNGs.

Thing I hate most is when people try to play the "well your internet sucks" card. I'm on a 355 Mbps connection, that's almost 30x faster than the average American broadband connection (and more than 10x south korea which is the fastest in the world). I don't care how fast your connection is loading a 20mb png file takes too damn long. God fuckin save me when I'm trying to load WAYWO on my phone.

People are all terrified of saving shit as a jpeg because they read on tumblr once that jpeg is lossy and that's bad. Ridiculous.

Edit: Sorry about the profanity, I have strong opinions about image formats.

JedTheKrampus

Yeah, I think this is the sort of thing that is not really possible to change by simple moderation or haranguing the community. Instead, this forum should have a feature where the server figures out whether the images that are linked take up more than 1mb and if they do it stores them on Polycount servers as 500kb JPEGs, with that 500k image being a link to the full resolution image in the post. I'm sure in reality it's more complicated than that, and personally I'd like to see Sketchfab and Marmoset Viewer working first, but it seems like it would be nice to have for image heavy threads.

pigart

I just hate the people that post 6+ 4K images of their gun from slightly different angles.

AtticusMars

Better yet just parse the image and hide all huge images behind a notice that says "click here to load this massive fucking image"

People will start compressing them properly, I guarantee it.

ZacD

I always do wireframe and UI images with png because jpeg compression artifacts look terrible, and those types of images should compress well with png. Also I would make most images 830px wide on the old forum because that's the limit before you have to click to expand, and that probably kept the file sizes small. 

AtticusMars

I always post at 6K just so everyone can see those mipmaps and UV seams in high resolution.

SonicBlue

The Polycount picture uploader does something wrong.

After converting the 3.35MB .png in .jpg, I got a file size of 707KB, uploaded that to the forum, and the files is now 1.79MB.

cookedpeanut

beefaroni said:

Yep, it's super frustrating. I wish there was a way to implement a 500kb or 1mb cap on images. Or a forum feature not to load images more than "x" MB.

This is a good idea, it's implemented on quite a few other forums as well. When a file is over a size limit it just places it as a link, else it displays the image in the thread if it's under this cap.

pior

Better yet just parse the image and hide all huge images behind a notice that says "click here to load this massive fucking image"

Loving this so much ! Someone please make it happen.

rebb

pior said:

Better yet just parse the image and hide all huge images behind a notice that says "click here to load this massive fucking image"

Loving this so much ! Someone please make it happen.

At that point it is probably not a huge step to implement an automatic "small image" script that auto-creates a smaller version for the forum view, i guess. Could potentially take up quite a bit of that PolyCount server space though as the preview images pile up

pior

But it would be nowhere near as fun (and educational)

Eric Chadwick

 As a general note, we can't just pull images to host them locally. People need to voluntarily upload their images. Hosting involuntarily runs into some sort of legal issue, even though of course we have your best interests at heart.

xvampire

Eric Chadwick said:

Am I the only one who hates waiting for these massive 8mb PNGs to download? I'm using 15mbps, so that's certainly an average net speed, not slow. Peoples' image servers seem to be the gating factor here.

Do people just not care about how their work gets passed over? Why wait for the d/l if the OP doesn't care enough to be considerate to their viewers? 

Sure, save your originals as PNG. But when you're posting online, please compress. JPG at 7 or 8 looks great, and downloads real quick.

</rant>

ctrl + C   directly from photoshop
 Ctrl + V directly to imgur,  ( it will automatically turn into large chunk of PNG)

 people feel seems really convenience because of that....

Needles

4chan fixed this issue a long time ago.. not that i wanna give them props for any other ideas they've had

skankerzero

When looking for people to contract, if their images take more than a couple seconds to load, I just move on.

Steve Schulze

They don't load at all half the time on my crappy internet connection. Or they load just enough so you get a bunch of blank space and the top couple of pixels of the actual model.

Make it a jpg that fits on my screen at a quality of 8-9 and it'll be perfectly good.

m4dcow

When I first started using greenshot, which makes it easy to take and upload screenshots to imgur, I noticed the default format was PNG. So I was guilty of uploading large images (though they typically weren't fullscreen). Thus anyone using greenshot, be courteous and check your preferences!

kaptainkernals

Perhaps in the image upload button, where you can upload / place a url to the message, have a warning / alert? Which at least informs people of the preferred dimensions / format / image size?

Could also block images that above a certain size, or of a certain file type. Check the HTTP headers for png and file size above 2mb, and autoblock them - or warn author that their image is too large before the post actually posts?

mr_

Yeah yeah, the auto modify (brute forcing) feature is a nice idea all in all, but let's not forget the other side of the coin: discipline. Explaining the dos and don'ts would be nice, specially for newcomers (most forums have their own set of rules and regulations). IMHO, these two would immensely increase the user experience.

Toku

Probably because "highresshot 4" in UE4 console outputs a .PNG file at 4 times the resolution of the editor window. And people are too lazy to process them before uploading >.>

ExcessiveZero

I don't use huge resolutions but I always use 24bit PNGs because I feel all other formats screw with my colour or my contrast.

pior

I feel all other formats screw with my colour or my contrast.

But ... do they ? With the proper color profile I would think JPGs work just fine in that regard. Any specific examples you could show ?

billymcguffin

It doesn't really matter if your images have perfect contrast if everyone closes the tab because they have to wait so long for your images to load.

ExcessiveZero

this isn't the best example but its what I have on hand as im working on some modular stuff, the difference in the Jpeg is subtle in this but its still there 

Jpeg- Hard to notice in this image but the background colour is lightly artifacting
http://imgur.com/tKJnpWf  -92.8kb
No.7 Jpeg, as Recommended here more artifacts
http://imgur.com/uNokfDh  -68.5kb
regular PNG- Contrast values are higher then they should be
http://i.imgur.com/5soTYiT  -952kb
24 Bit PNG - looks pretty much as it should far as I can tell
http://i.imgur.com/iLgLmXt -728kb

Now I am not in favour of huge 4K 20meg wip images to show a gun from a new angle or whatever, Obviously crazy resolutions are crazy , but if you want the image true to as you are making it I have found 24bit PNGs to give the best result, but regular Jpegs like the first should suit for Wips.

Eric Chadwick

The artifacts are too subtle for your viewers to notice. Only you the creator, examining every tiny detail, will see them. You have to put yourself in the viewer's position, what is the most accessible way for them to see your work? No one else but you cares about the "true" image, we just want to see the work easily.

These are medium resolution images, with lots of blank-color space, so they PNG without taking much space. However the PNG is still 7-8 times the size of the JPG, so it downloads slower. I understand your argument , but it doesn't matter to anyone but the creator, and besides it doesn't scale well to 2k image sizes.

ExcessiveZero

Eric Chadwick said:

The artifacts are too subtle for your viewers to notice. Only you the creator, examining every tiny detail, will see them. You have to put yourself in the viewer's position, what is the most accessible way for them to see your work? No one else but you cares about the "true" image, we just want to see the work easily.

These are medium resolution images, with lots of blank-color space, so they PNG without taking much space. However the PNG is still 7-8 times the size of the JPG, so it downloads slower. I understand your argument , but it doesn't matter to anyone but the creator, and besides it doesn't scale well to 2k image sizes.

well I can't disagree with that, I will for sure be using Jpgs more in the future personally having broke it down on memory cost, and quality, but I think you have just worked out the root cause of why creators use PNGs, its an act of vanity in a sense to have it seen exactly as it should be the "true image" opposed to how the viewer wishes to see it, easily, fast and with no big bandwidth cost.

AtticusMars

1mb doesn't seem like much until you go through WAYWO and realize how many people have the exact same mentality when posting images, a WAYWO page that might have been 20mb of jpegs quickly becomes 150mb of PNGs when they all decide that the PNG is "small enough"

Money

I remember when viewing screenshot thread on gaf, that they would always say not to use imgur because it compresses jpeg badly, so I got used to using abload for posting my images. Here's jpeg version from ExcessiveZero of that regular png saved as jpeg (used max 12 quality for preset). Even with max setting image is 3x smaller in size. For posts with many images, that's considerable save.

ExcessiveZero said:

regular PNG- Contrast values are higher then they should be
http://i.imgur.com/5soTYiT  -952kb

http://abload.de/img/5sotyitoxslp.jpg

pior

Yeah Zero, the first one is by far the best choice - and on top of that this image has low readability to begin with. Be more bold !

Eric Chadwick

To choose which JPG compression level, I recommend trying a test. Load one of your original uncompressed images, and save multiple versions, each one using a different level. Then swap through them and compare.

I think Photoshop compresses better than most other apps, and for me level 8 is excellent for size vs. quality. From an average viewer's perspective, the quality difference between 12 and 8 is not noticeable, but the file size certainly is.

monster

Eric Chadwick said:

The artifacts are too subtle for your viewers to notice. Only you the creator, examining every tiny detail, will see them...
...but it doesn't matter to anyone but the creator...

Don't hate the player! Hate the game.

SuperPNG plugin for Photoshop can get you about half the size as the default PNG output.
http://www.fnordware.com/superpng/

JPG saved at 8 is still smaller. So that's probably the way to go.

mospheric

I think .pngs are fine, though I run all of mine through TINYPNG. This will bring the size down to their .jpeg counterparts. I recommend if people are still hooked on .pngs.

Eric Chadwick

mospheric said:

I think .pngs are fine, though I run all of mine through TINYPNG. This will bring the size down to their .jpeg counterparts. I recommend if people are still hooked on .pngs.

Um, no.

I did a quick test with your most recent images, I hope you don't mind. Saved them as JPG level 8.


Here's a zip. If you flip through them, can you see the difference? 
http://www.ericchadwick.com/examples/files/Mospheric_PNGvsJPG.zip

marks

People who hotlink png's on the internet ... no. Just no. There is no need, don't do it.

mats effect

Have to say after trying it I can't see a difference at all and the size saving is massive and helps loading times sooooo much. Not to Mention that people are more likely to look at and give feedback on your work if they don't have to wait on large files to pop in. 

Eric Chadwick

AtticusMars said:

Yeah... I was going to ask when the new WAYWO thread gets made if the top level post could ask people not to post PNGs.

I added a section on image etiquette to each WAYWO, to the New Members Introduction, and to the Artists Looking For Work. We're also sending polite reminders to those who post excessively large images.

I hope this helps! It's really for the benefit of all... you the artist get more eyeballs on your work, and everyone else gets a nice speedy viewing experience.

Two Listen

I can see not caring for 3D work, but I do prefer it when paintings are .pngs rather than .jpgs.  Sometimes that's the difference between telling what size brush someone used to paint a face, and not being able to say for certain.  Granted...could they just post cropped images of the full res as .jpgs for a closer look?  Yeah, probably.  Best of both worlds I guess.  But I'll usually take a 800kb png over a 100kb jpg any day.

Of course, if I was going to post an image more than 1k on any side, would it be a .png?  No.  That is dumb.

Does the Internet still hate me for using .pngs, even if I keep file size down to <~700kb?  I am willing to reconsider my outlook.

Eric Chadwick

Under 1mb is golden, whether jpg or png or whatever web format floats your boat. 

Anim GIFs are a bit different IMO, under 3 mb seems to be OK. Though something like GIFV is better, since streaming video is generally better at preloading than stuttery GIFs.

Eric Chadwick

Two Listen said:

I can see not caring for 3D work, but I do prefer it when paintings are .pngs rather than .jpgs.  Sometimes that's the difference between telling what size brush someone used to paint a face, and not being able to say for certain.  

If you can't see the brush strokes, then IMO the artist is compressing too much. Best way to learn how much to compress is to save copies at multiple compression levels, then compare and pick the best tradeoff. The best is not always going to be level 8 (or whatever).

ZacD

Also certain types of painting might compress well with PNG, especially with lots of flat colors or gradients. And stuff like hexels.

arrangemonk

support for bpg anyone?
http://bellard.org/bpg/

Bedrock

Imgur absolutely wrecks image quality when it converts PNGs to JPG, which might be why a lot of people ended up just uploading pngs here. Photoshop jpg conversion 8-10 quality is the way to go. Did that for all images on my portfolio website since I had all the images load in one go and quality was good enough. Actually for those images specifically I might have used irfanview's batch convert, it's pretty decent.