Save disk space with JPEGmini pro vs Blogstomp
For any photographer who processes and stores large volumes of image files, the sizes of the digital files can be a big deal.
If you can save a few megabytes on the size of each file this can make a big difference to the upload time for a wedding with say 400 images, and the amount of disk space required to store the images online and on the computer hard disk. It is therefore well worth running the finished JPEG files through image compression software to get the file sizes as small as is possible, whilst making sure there is no reduction in the quality of the images.
There are several ways of going about this, but the method I have been using for some time is to use the “industry standard” software JPEGmini Pro to reduce high quality (100%) jpeg images generated by Adobe Lightroom (or, more recently Capture One). The results are quite dramatic, achieving a file size reduction of over 60% in many cases. Well worth it!
Now there is a newcomer on the block in the form of Blogstomp 3.5. Blogstomp is a neat software “app” used by photographers for combining multiple images into montages for putting on blogs, as the name suggests. However in version 3.5 they quietly introduced a built in style called “Space Saver”, which on the face of it does pretty much the same thing as JPEGmini. One difference is Blogstomp generates a new set of reduced size images, whereas JPEGmini gives you the choice of either a new set or overwriting the original set.
But how do the two compare when it comes to crunching the file sizes? I ran a test using 10 Lightroom jpegs (100% quality) to find out. The results surprised me, so I repeated it to make sure the results were consistent.
|Lightroom (100%)||101 MB|
|JPEGmini Pro||41.5 MB|
|Lightroom (100%)||130 MB|
|JPEGmini Pro||46.3 MB|
So there you have it. Blogstomp achieved better compression than the “industry standard”. There is one caveat, which is that JPEGmini is tested and validated to a standard, whereas I have not read any information about either Blogstomp’s methods or any testing they might have done.
As far as I can tell the images out of Blogstomp are every bit as good the originals, and I couldn’t identify any artifacts that might have been introduced by excessive compression.
Perhaps best of all, many photographers already own Blogstomp, and can benefit without having to shell out for another piece of software. Blogstomp is a one off purchase and updates from earlier versions are free.