i know bigger is better but...9626 x 6970 is overkill
possibly biggiest image EVER!

hehe post #8424

fireattack said:
hehe post #8424

is this the largest one in the site?the pool which contains the picture has so many imges larger than 10000x10000

livorno99 said:
is this the largest one in the site?the pool which contains the picture has so many imges larger than 10000x10000

yes. order:mpixels -flash

fireattack said:
hehe post #8424

my computer almost colapsed.

fireattack said:
yes. order:mpixels -flash

thanks a lot!

fireattack said:
hehe post #8424

You know that ImageOptim reduces this pictures size from 37.5 MB to 21.2 MB without altering a single pixel? (-43.5%)
Should I reupload the optimized Image?

Hermes666 said:
my computer almost colapsed.

the mine did

Hermes666 said:
my computer almost colapsed.

itsu-chan said:
the mine did

Sorry :S

MosquitoJack said:
You know that ImageOptim reduces this pictures size from 37.5 MB to 21.2 MB without altering a single pixel? (-43.5%)
Should I reupload the optimized Image?

I don't think it's necessary. BTW, I knew there're some tools can crush jpeg losslessly, but I don't think they can do so much (-43.5%). ImageOptim's official site doesn't say its operation is lossless either (can't try since i'm using Windows).

Hiromekis said:
i know bigger is better but...9626 x 6970 is overkill
possibly biggiest image EVER!

How else do you think it could hold those boobs? ;)

Kalessin said:
How else do you think it could hold those boobs? ;)

Me
Its me or it looks like some 3D program I know? spoiler MMD?

MosquitoJack said:
You know that ImageOptim reduces this pictures size from 37.5 MB to 21.2 MB without altering a single pixel? (-43.5%)
Should I reupload the optimized Image?

Space and bandwidth is not a issue.

fireattack said:
I don't think it's necessary. BTW, I knew there're some tools can crush jpeg losslessly, but I don't think they can do so much (-43.5%). ImageOptim's official site doesn't say its operation is lossless either (can't try since i'm using Windows).

The application uses JPEGOptim and Jpegtran internally (as well as several PNG optimisers and Gifsicle). The work losslessly if given the proper params - I've checked. Usually they achieve savings of 2-10%. Larger savings like 25-50% are quite rare and speak against the quality of the initial compressor.