File talk:Fritz Syberg, Kunstnerens datter betragter duerne i vindueskarmen.png

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Overly bloated[edit]

@Rsteen: there is nothing inherently wrong with the image, but the file data size is just over 10 MiB (10,491,052 B to be precise). This happened because 24-bit color is poorly compressible due to high informational entropy; hence the size is a consequence of the lossless compression mode chosen. Look at sizes of Commons images of similar resolution, even very detailed ones. This huge size is certainly not a first-world problem, but it was not right to mark a file “superseded” where the proposed replacement has poor accessibility. As a possible solution other than JPEG, yesterday I made a 256-color version of the same image (see http://www.superstructure.info/test/Syberg.png ), which is worth 2,315,284 bytes, but hesitated whether to upload it to Commons, and did not upload (as of now). Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:55, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Incnis Mrsi: Thanks for answering the question, originally put on your talk page. The "SupersededPNG" tag was put there because Commons recommend PNG over jpg, and therefore recommend replacement of jpg files when alternatives exist. It would be possible to make a link, "other versions", to the new file you made (File:Syberg_Pigeons.jpg) if you think that would be an improvement. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 08:39, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
“… Commons recommend[s] PNG over jpg” – what are you speaking about? I fought against JPEG diagrams, maps (or, broader, all pictures which should look like a poster) before Rsteen was even registered in Wikimedia, but Commons never discouraged JPEGs in general. There are plenty of cases where such compression is appropriate. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 09:05, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Well, Commons:File types states "If you have a choice of file formats in which to save a graphic, scan, or other such thing, save it as PNG ..." And yes, there are many other recommendations, but pulling rank/claiming seniority may not be the best way to make your point. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 19:59, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
There is a subtle difference between saving and uploading. Surely, better to store certain images in PNG or TIFF rather than JPEG – it makes them editable without going to look like an ancient fresco (example). For end users JPEG is in many cases more preferable, hence better to have both lossless and JPEG (derivable from the former) versions of the picture. Incnis Mrsi (talk) 07:50, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
So, we more or less agree. The advice to the small group uploading works by Danish artists will then still be to upload in PNG, unless a comparable jpg file exists - in which case it is not worth the time and trouble. Smaller and comparable jpg files will be labeled as "Superseded", but if a comparable jpg version co-exists with the png-version, it will be linked to as "other versions", providing access for those with limited bandwidth/storage. Cheers --Rsteen (talk) 09:16, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]