this post was submitted on 19 Dec 2023
430 points (99.8% liked)

Memes @ Reddthat

1010 readers
3 users here now

The Memes community. Where Memes matter the most.

We abide by Reddthat's Instance Rules & the Lemmy Code of Conduct. By interacting here you agree to these terms.

Rules

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LostXOR@kbin.social 46 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

It losslessly compressed ~150GB of my PNGs to ~75GB, so I'd say it's definitely better space-wise.

[–] cryptiod137@lemmy.world 13 points 11 months ago (1 children)

It's absolutely not loseless at any kind of quality past web content

[–] LostXOR@kbin.social 62 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

The WebP format supports fully lossless compression in addition to lossy compression. I used the lossless mode for my images.

[–] IamRoot@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago (2 children)

Might want to check your math.

[–] LostXOR@kbin.social 19 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What do you mean? That's the total file size of the images before and after I converted them to webp.

[–] IamRoot@sh.itjust.works 2 points 11 months ago (1 children)

How is that possible when google says it is 26% smaller?

[–] LostXOR@kbin.social 40 points 11 months ago (3 children)

Depending on the content of the image, the compression ratio can vary a lot. The 26% figure is probably for "normal" photos. My images are mostly a few shades of black with a few white pixels (using a camera as a radiation detector) and I guess WebP is way better at compressing that than PNG.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 5 points 11 months ago (1 children)

using a camera as a radiation detector

So… detected any yet?

[–] LostXOR@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Yep! Here's a few hours of combined exposure of the radiation from an americium source from a smoke detector.
image

[–] XpeeN@sopuli.xyz 2 points 11 months ago

If you'd upload this image with no description I'd be sure it's a photo of stars in the sky lol

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 1 points 11 months ago
[–] IamRoot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago
[–] dubyakay@lemmy.ca 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

using a camera as a radiation detector

I need to hear more

[–] LostXOR@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

I wanted to see if I could detect the radiation from a small sample of americium-241 that I pulled out of a smoke detector, so I put a Pi camera with no lens facing it and took exposures for a couple hours. After combining them and removing dead pixels I ended up with tons of tiny white specks where radiation had hit the camera sensor. I linked the final image below, and here's a timelapse video (compositing newer frames onto older frames to keep the radiation specks). video

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 11 points 11 months ago (1 children)

What? Why? I see one number, I see another number, I report both numbers and because it's not what you're expecting, then "it must be my math skills"?

How does that make sense in any context?

[–] IamRoot@sh.itjust.works 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Who are you? I didn’t tell you anything.

[–] elbarto777@lemmy.world 5 points 11 months ago