View Single Post
Old 07-02-2020, 01:38 PM   #12
j.p.s
Grand Sorcerer
j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.j.p.s ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 5,806
Karma: 103362673
Join Date: Apr 2011
Device: pb360
Quote:
Originally Posted by JSWolf View Post
It wasn't lossless. It was a recompression of the JPG images. But it also got rid of the garbage in the JPG making them even smaller. You won't notice any difference in the original or the newly compressed images especially with eInk.
Then why did you write that you losslessly compressed them? JPEG compression itself is lossy and JPEG recompression results in additional loss. There is not necessarily anything wrong with that, but it is wrong to call it lossless.

Also, when I come to an illustration that merits it, I open the book on a tablet to view that illustration, so I probably would notice.

It is possible to make lossless transformations of JPEG images, such as cropping and rotations that are integer multiples of 90 degrees. But cropping and/or rotating and saving as JPEG does not necessarily do so losslessly.

The meanings of words matter.
j.p.s is online now   Reply With Quote