Right now its looking like there is absolutely no advantage in using JPEGmini over the regular save-as-jpeg inside Photoshop. Well… this is interesting, because the Photoshop level 9 jpeg is only 6.5 megs vs 10.6 for the JPEGmini version, and it looks better… no visible “block” artifacts, and we are hard pressed to see any loss in detail or texture! To be sure this level of artifacting is just barely visible at 300%-nobody could see this at normal sizes in any type of output, so no problems with either jpeg, still… the Photoshop jpeg looks better, the “Difference” test is better, and its smaller! This is a 6.5 meg file, quite a bit smaller than the JPEGmini version, and it doesn’t show the same level of “block” artifacts! We begin with a simple test-Lets save a Jpeg!
#Jpegmini sale software#
The implication of the JPEGmini website is that this software somehow makes better jpegs, and that is what I thought I was trying to find out! In the end I managed to separate marketing spin from real world utility that I hope gives you some idea about the complexity of the issues of truth in advertising. These are the same standard jpegs you can get out of Lightroom or Photoshop-it just makes a determination about how much compression to apply without user intervention! Whether that is of any particular use to you is another issue altogether! The software, either as a plugin for Photoshop or Lightroom, or a stand-alone app, applies some image analysis to determine whether a given jpeg can be compressed further without visible degradation, and if it can, it applies a higher level of jpeg compression to make the image file smaller on disk! Thats it… There is no secret sauce jpeg magic that gives you better jpegs at a given size. OK, so before I go too far, this is what I found out! JPEGmini works for what it is really designed to do-however, what it really does is not very clear on their website, or in their advertising. So… after this long-winded introduction, the rest of this post dives into a detailed analysis of just what this software does… Spoiler for those impatient readers So what’s a self respecting photo-guru supposed to do? Test it for themselves, of course!
#Jpegmini sale pro#
Of course there are a pro version at $99, and a “server” version for $199/month…much more expensive for additional workflow benefits. Actually, combing over their website, they scrupulously avoid making that exact claim, but that is certainly the implication, and at $29 for the base version, it seems like a relatively low cost for the benefit. Well along comes JEPEGmini with just that promise! JPEGmini claims to reduce the size of the image, faster, with better quality than you can using a normal Photoshop centric workflow. Its kind of like VHS vs Betamax (millennials should Google this) – a basically inferior method of compression stays in use simply because everyone is already using it, thank you very much! Can we make a better jpeg using the exact same standard, so that it is easily integrated into your workflow, and still universally accepted? The plain-Jane jpeg is still the format of choice when it comes to photographic images on the internet.
Why shouldn’t there be a better jpeg? Of course there already is a superior image compression format-its available inside Photoshop, no less, and its called jpeg 2000 (because it was invented way back in the year 2000.) Unfortunately, jpeg 2000 is largely ignored by just about everyone. Yes… someone decided that what the world really needs is another way to generate jpegs, one that doesn’t suck! Well… nothing really wrong with that idea, other than the part that jpegs suck… but I’m getting ahead of myself here.
I was recently invited to test out a new software, plugin and stand-alone, for generating jpegs. JPEGmini comes as a stand-alone app & as plugins for Photoshop & Lightroom.
0 kommentar(er)
