EWWW Image Optimizer
[resolved] Some doubts i have about the optimization (6 posts)

  1. Julian Fernandes
    Posted 4 years ago #

    First of all, excelent plugin :)

    But i have a question and i would love to have it answered. Right now i use Trimage to do this job, cause i use it on my Ubuntu desktop and figured i would use it on my Ubuntu server too. What i did is set a cron to run the optimizer on upload folder everynight at around 3~4am, so the load won't slow our website down.

    Trimage uses optipng, pngcrush, advancecomp and jpegoptim, and i want to know if EWWW Image Optimizer, with the libs he uses, would optimize the images better than Trimage. Could you answer this? :)


  2. nosilver4u
    Plugin Author

    Posted 4 years ago #

    First, it's difficult to say too much with accuracy, because I couldn't find any place where the author had documented the options that trimage passes to the image compression utilities.

    However, here's what I do know...
    Regarding PNGs, EWWW uses optipng, which is a newer fork of pngcrush designed to be more flexible and faster. I've chosen an optimization level for optipng somewhere in the middle of what the author of optipng recommends at http://optipng.sourceforge.net/pngtech/optipng.html

    advancecomp (advpng) apparently does not do everything on it's own, and trimage runs either optipng or pngcrush in conjunction with advpng.

    All that said, it really depends on what level of optimization trimage uses, and the only way to know, is by testing trimage vs just plain optipng in a few trials (I'll leave that up to you). The options I use for optipng can be found over on the FAQ. Additionally, in the latest release, I've made the level configurable, just beware that higher levels can take considerable time compared to the defaults (even that takes a while as PNGs increase in size).

    Now, for JPGs, from what I remember, jpegtran and jpegoptim use pretty much identical optimization, and I suspect you won't find any difference there. The only extra space to be squeezed out with either program is by stripping out all the metadata (which is off by default in my plugin, but can be turned on via the Settings page).

    I'm afraid that's still awfully vague, and requires testing to prove anything, but I hope it helps.

  3. Julian Fernandes
    Posted 4 years ago #

    That actualy helped :)
    I will do some tests tonight on my desktop and see what happens... then i come here tell you.


  4. nosilver4u
    Plugin Author

    Posted 4 years ago #

    I released 1.0.5 last night (got a newborn here, so I'm up at odd hours), should produce identical results now between jpegtran and jpegoptim (it did for me). I'd be curious to see what you found out regarding PNGs, and then we can mark this resolved.

  5. Alex Vojacek
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Congrats for the newborn!

  6. Julian Fernandes
    Posted 4 years ago #

    Sorry for the delay,
    Did a test here and with the default settings (on FAQ page), those libs lost by about 1kb to trimage.

    Image with trimage: 24kb
    Imagine with those libs: 25kb

    But we can now set the compress level on plugin too, right? So i guess it wins. Besides, i won't need to set a cron to run trimage on wp-upload all the time, so... you won me *installs plugin* :)

    Also, congratz on the newborn!

Topic Closed

This topic has been closed to new replies.

About this Plugin

  • EWWW Image Optimizer
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Support Threads
  • Reviews

About this Topic