Inspiring

Question

Saving smallest JPG possible with Photoshop

Forum|Forum|7 years ago
June 22, 2018
6 replies
17833 views

I wanted to know what the best way to save a JPG to be very small and still keep its quality as much as possible. i have 1200x1200 psd files that when i save them while keeping quality the jpg is around 500kb. I used to save them as JPG 10 which is maximum and changed it to 5 that is medium, i think anything less than that and the quality is bad. is there any third party software that shrinks? preferably as a Photoshop plugin like JPEGmini Pro and tinyPNG promise they do, script or action or any other Photoshop method to shrink it?

any help will be appreciated, thank you.

This topic has been closed for replies.

WILDCAT54

Inspiring

Try tinypng

They have a Photoshop extension for both PNG and JPEG files.

We compress all images with this before putting them onto our website

AG_Ps_100Author

Inspiring

I have a NEF file, i save it as PSD + JPG (Quality = 5) + another JPG (Quality = 5) after hiding the watermark

I want the 2 JPG files i saved to be compressed by tinyPNG, i think that i don't even need a JPG file in the first place to compress and i can save a JPG from a PSD file. that is written on their website:

so to sum up i need PSD + 2 compressed/saved JPG by tinyPNG

you think it is possible?

AG_Ps_100Author

Inspiring

to be more clear about the psd file i have a background layer, layer with a carpet, and watermark layer.

this image needs to go toa website - online store.

maybe i should be using PNG instead of JPG?

JohanElzenga

Community Expert

I don't see the problem here. The image in your screenshot is 800 x 800 pixels. If I cut it out of the screenshot and save it with jpeg-compression 8, the file size is 157 KB. That means that a 1200 x 1200 pixel version of this image should save well below 500 KB at the same compression.

-- Johan W. Elzenga

AG_Ps_100Author

Inspiring

I will google "jpeg-compression 8" also, but maybe you know what are the consequences to jpeg-compression 8?

lossless colors?

picture quality/colors affected?

will be viewed normally in all media like smartphones? etc.

this is important to know before because these carpets are used in an online shop, a mistake or something like that which will require uploading the same pictures again is something i really should avoid

schmar

Inspiring

There are several tricks to save images for the web besides, well, using the "Save for Web" Export :-D

#1 Blur the details:

Very fine detailed structures within the image are a compression killer. In some cases it makes sense to use a selective blur to blur out the fine details which nobody sees and to keep contours. More smooth areas = better compression

#2 Increase the image dimensions

So this sounds crazy but it's true, sometimes you could get a better result by increasing the imagesize and saving it with a higher compression. e.g. the image is embedded with 1200px in your website, save it with 2400px but with a higher compressionrate (Quality: 5-10 or so). It might look better in the end compared to and 1200px image where you have to set the Quality to 50-60 to get an acceptable result and you support 4k devices too ;-)

andreamaestri

Participating Frequently

I like use external jpeg compression services like JPEGMini or have a look of what google suggest to have the best optimization for online images Image Optimization | Web Fundamentals | Google Developers

D Fosse

Community Expert

500kB still seems a bit high. Try Save For Web or Export, which will strip any metadata that may bloat file size. At the same time you can preview quality directly as you try to push the slider down as far as possible.

Jpeg compression depends entirely on image content. Lots of high frequency detail will compress less effectively and result in a big file.

Two images at 1200x1200, saved through SFW at quality 50. The first is 367 kB, the second 58 kB:

Trevor.Dennis

Community Expert

That's a very convincing demonstration of how JPG compression works Dag, and I love that the second image also has a boat. Was the first picture taken local to you? Looking at the angle of the rock faces either size, and the size of the boats, that water must be fairly deep, but it is so clear.

We have a famously clear pool called Pupu Springs near Takaka in Golden Bay. This will have been taken a while back as they don't allow diving there any more for fear of didymo contamination which is a nasty slimy weed otherwise known as rock-snot (sorry to anyone readying this while eating )

Anyway, your waterway above is right up there with the springs, and I'm not sure that Greenpeace are going to have much impact out of that little orange Rib.

D Fosse

Community Expert

Trevor.Dennis wrote
Was the first picture taken local to you? Looking at the angle of the rock faces either size, and the size of the boats, that water must be fairly deep, but it is so clear.

The magic trick of polarizers Happily the angle to the sun was just right. This is on an island off the western coast of Norway. I know you have fjords in NZ, but the word is Norwegian...

The shot was taken from a bridge crossing a narrow sound, and the water is actually quite shallow. I was driving past and hit the brake fast when I saw this. I couldn't believe how those boats even got in there.

Beautiful underwater shot from the pool. They have something similar up in Iceland - a lot of movie underwater scenes are shot there because the water is so clear.

JohanElzenga

Community Expert

The compression of a jpeg depends very much on the content, so it's impossible to say how well your 1200 x 1200 pixel image should compress. A file size of 500 KB does not sound excessively small, however. Make sure you strip all metadata, they can take a bit of space too.

-- Johan W. Elzenga

Sign up

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Sign in to Adobe Community

To post, reply, or follow discussions, please sign in with your Adobe ID.

Scanning file for viruses.

This file cannot be downloaded