I'm trying to determine which format is better to use when there is no transparency in an image. More importantly though, I'm trying to figure out when it's better to use one over the other.
From what I understand, JPEG essentially tricks the human eye into filling in the gaps by limiting the information to just enough that the details still appear to be the same image at specific sizes.
JPEG is probably best for detailed images.
All I can confidently state about PNG, is that it is a lossless file format that supports transparency.
I have been looking them up, but there is a whole host of information that I have to read through, and then read deeper to make sure I understand. I can't find a particularly good description either. So hopefully I can get a good answer here.
When should I use PNG over JPEG?
When should I use JPEG over PNG?
What are the strengths of each format, from a graphic designers point of view?
Answer
For me... with no transparency.. whichever is smaller (kb).
Save for Web in Adobe apps allows you to switch between formats to compare resulting file sizes. I simply switch between PNG24 and JPG to compare the resulting sizes.
I start with JPG medium (30) and check quality. Then compare to the PNG24 size. If JPG 30 is smaller.... I start stepping up by quality settings of 10. I try JPG 40. Still smaller than the PNG, then JPG 50, if quality requires it.
It's all a "look and see" game. You have to determine, image by image, what quality or format is needed. In my experiences, there's no such thing as a setting with always works better (other than gif for single image animation).
No comments:
Post a Comment