: Small JPEG image (just 21.8 KB) without lack of quality — why is that? This image size is just 21.8 KB without lack of quality. Why is that? How is it done?

@Vandalay110

This sort of photo is great for a JPEG compression algorithm. Excerpts from the JPEG FAQ:


Generally speaking, JPEG is superior to GIF for storing full-color or
gray-scale images of "realistic" scenes; that means scanned photographs,
continuous-tone artwork, and similar material. Any smooth variation in
color, such as occurs in highlighted or shaded areas, will be represented
more faithfully and in less space by JPEG than by GIF.

JPEG has a hard time with very sharp edges: a row of pure-black pixels
adjacent to a row of pure-white pixels, for example.


75% of this image is one color. The photo of the man in this photo is actually pretty uniform as well - gray shirt, black pants. The only place where the JPEG image really needs to add complexity to not look terrible are the lines that separate the man from the background, the tie from the shirt, etc.

Give the guy a colorful plaid shirt and watch the file size grow quite a bit! Same story if there was a background with a large depth of field.

Vote Up Vote Down

@Lee3735518

Here a lot of artifacts = quality loss compression. Since it have plain gray background the final size of JPG is quite small and artifacts are not so obvious.

Vote Up Vote Down