>>2755499>I'm impressed at how were able to get the file so small with any apparent loss in quality.Alright, I think it's time I educate you people on compression.
Most people believe PNG is the absolute best option for saving art, but the greater the resolution, the more impractical it gets. The file ends up absurdly large, whereas maximum jpg compression looks virtually lossless at about 48% of the file size.
People who are absolutely adamant that their pics be saved as png have no idea what the fuck they're talking about. I've had people demand png even if the original picture was already jpg compressed ffs.
Objectively, there are only two reasons why you'd ever need to save a large resolution image as png: TRANSPARENCY (gif has a 256 color limit, and one "color" is the transparency, so there's zero gradient) and LAYERS (which you don't need if the intent is to simply upload it to an image hoster; it's not like you turn layers on and off outside of e.g. Photoshop). Pointless otherwise.
As for the quality, nothing to think about with Photoshop; there's literally no reason to not use JPG compression at setting 12 (maximum). I can almost guarantee that you can save it under 4MB to upload here. You will not notice artifacts unless you zoom the fuck in (or have unreasonably low desktop resolution for some reason). So, I use max compression if it makes sense, and basically lower the setting only to get it under 4MB. Meanwhile with PNG format it doesn't take much resolution for pics to get >20MB, which is simply absurd.
tl;dr jpg compression is excellent, png is for retards
Pic related. Also, I deliberately used art with a dark palette to further the point; artifacts are much less noticeable in brighter/warmer colors. If you can see artifacts on the hair, that's kind of expected, but if you can see them on her skin -- e.g. nipples -- without zooming in and without putting your eyes right up to the screen, you're a fucking liar.
