WordPress.org

Ready to get started?Download WordPress

Forums

EWWW Image Optimizer
[resolved] bulk optimizer and re-optimizer not working (13 posts)

  1. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    bulk optimizer not working in nextgen gallery and re-optimize doesn't work either.

    may not be as great as I thought it was.....my files are still too big.

    http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/ewww-image-optimizer/

  2. nosilver4u
    Member
    Plugin Author

    Posted 1 year ago #

    Define 'not working' please with a bit more detail.

    Also, please confirm that you are using the latest version: 1.4.4

  3. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    yes..using newest update.

    when I select the image gallery, then click on bulk optimize in the drop down menu of my "manage gallery" section in NGG, the page refreshes with no results. it simply goes back to the way it was with nothing (no images) having been optimized. I've tried everything. It only works if I optimize each image separately.

    and, in the case of the re-optimize situation, it always says "no savings". some of these are still large files, even though there has been some savings in the first optimization. just not enough to be of real value to me.

    its a great idea with a few really good features. it just doesn't do as much as I had thought and hoped.

  4. nosilver4u
    Member
    Plugin Author

    Posted 1 year ago #

    Are you sure it doesn't refresh with a Start Optimizing button near the top? Integration with NextGEN is tricky, so you have to click Apply, then OK. THEN you will see the page refresh, and Bulk Optimize should appear at the top of the page with a Start Optimizing button.

    Re-optimizing usually doesn't do anything, unless you've changed your optimization levels or told the plugin to remove EXIF information from JPGs.
    The exception to this is thumbnails, since those don't get optimized when images are uploaded.

    The savings you see overall will vary greatly depending on your images. Images straight from a camera often see 15-35% savings. If you've edited an image and used all the proper settings, you should see little to no savings. The plugin NEVER resizes anything, the savings it can accomplish are due mainly to cameras and editors having lazy defaults.

    For example, most cameras do not use full Huffman encoding, because it uses more battery power. Likewise, with PNG images, optimizing takes lots of CPU, so most photo editors don't do it very well, or they tag on loads of metadata. I ran across a JPG at work once that was 90% metadata because of some stupidity with Photoshop.

    If you really want an efficient website, there is more to it than optimization also. See the links on the FAQ (near the bottom) for more info.

  5. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    my bad...I totally missed the button at the top of the screen. still not having much luck on the resize, but no big deal. I took an example though of an image that was over 200 kb and reduced it in photoshop to 65 kb while keeping the same size. I tend to load these with higher quality levels than necessary. reducing the dpi to 72 and then reducing the quality to 8 as opposed to 10-12 helps with photoshop.

    I've been wrestling with yslow grades, etc. for a while, but my server says my site loads well for a shared server. seems just fine, but ive been trying to tweek it as much as possible, which is what led me to this plugin.

    thanks for the support.

  6. nosilver4u
    Member
    Plugin Author

    Posted 1 year ago #

    I should have clarified further on the optimization. Everything the plugin does for optimization is lossless, so you don't lose a single pixel, as opposed to reducing the quality level in photoshop. quality 8 is probably a good setting for JPGs, but the dpi doesn't (or shouldn't) change anything all by itself. It is a print-only setting, and has no effect on the image size unless you actually reduce the dimensions of the image as well.

    For example, you could have a 100 dpi image that is 600x800 pixels, and if you reduce that to 72 dpi, and the image is still 600x800 pixels, nothing will change. So quality level is a good thing to experiment with, and optimizing with this plugin will squeeze the last few bits out of the image.

  7. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    thanks...

    for me personally, none of my images will ever be straight from the camera as they are photos of my paintings and I crop, align, adjust color balance and re-size before uploading to my site. I will do a better job of optimizing before loading and then I will run the plugin to see if there are any changes and let you know my findings.

    as per other site optimization, I am using w3 total cache but haven't had the time or expertise yet to manually minify my js and css files.

    feel free to view my site.

    thanks again!

  8. nosilver4u
    Member
    Plugin Author

    Posted 1 year ago #

    For minification, I generally use cloudflare. It's an external web proxy of sorts that has some great security features as well. I tried w3tc for a while, and it caused too many issues for me, particularly in the minification area, so I use WP Super Cache now, and do all the minification with cloudflare.

  9. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    I wonder if w3tc and cloudflare are compatable if I only use the w3tc for cache? I had wp supercache also, but I thought I was going to be able to get w3tc configured free by my host, so I went with that, but that didn't turn out. no problems with it so far though.

    is the free version of cloudflare worth anything?

  10. nosilver4u
    Member
    Plugin Author

    Posted 1 year ago #

    I used to have w3tc and cloudflare running both on my blog without any troubles so long as I didn't have minification turned on for w3tc. I use the free version of cloudflare on all my websites.

  11. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    cool. I will give it a try. thanks.

  12. bwoff
    Member
    Posted 1 year ago #

    I discovered something odd today. I have often suspected this, but today I know for sure that an image that was 75kb on my desktop was 156k AFTER being uploaded in Nextgen. I deactivated your plugin to see if that was an issue, but the exact same size appeared after a second try. It is all Nextgen.

    I havealways wondered why images that I upload are larger if I take them off the page and compare them to the original.

    any idea what's up with this?

  13. nosilver4u
    Member
    Plugin Author

    Posted 1 year ago #

    Not sure what to tell you on that, as I've not seen the same behavior. Is it perhaps an issue with watermarking or some nextgen option that is adding additional metadata to the images?

    To test the metadata, you could check the EWWW IO option to remove JPG metadata, and optimize a single image to see if it gets shrunk back to the original size...

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Plugin

About this Topic

Tags

No tags yet.