Rant number.. something-- (it's a long time coming)
Jpeg, Mpeg, Zip... what do they have in common?
orig-4,309kb
compressed-4,279kb-- saved: thirty kilobytes.
2,607kb
2,597kb-- saved: ten kilobytes.
The first is a mp3, an original, and then the zip archive as achieved by right click- send to- compressed folder.
The second is a jpeg file. (yeah they come that big if you're shopping nasa), archive attained in the same manner.
4,664kb
0,169kb
saved-- 4495 kilobytes.
That is a bitmap (which everyone knows comes that large). Obviously there's quite a bit of difference, compared to almost nil with the mp3 and jpeg.
58,795kb
58, 319kb
saved-- 476kb
This is another mp3. a fifty minute long one (a la annex:DD *loves on johnnah*) Let's do a bit of cross-multiplication now.
feasibly, original size over saved amount should be similar between the mp3s, right? that's a proportion, for those of you who forgot geometry class.
Two mp3s.
58795/476 =/= 4309/30 ==
4309*479 and 58795*30
We'll be tricky and take out the 30, pretending it's X.
2,064,011/58795 hopefully it's 30, right?
Inexplicably, it's 35. strange. close enough for me though. Apparently total size is a factor.
Let's try a jpeg and a bitmap now.
2607/10 =/= 4664/4495
4664*10 and 2607*4495.
We'll do the same and take out the 4495, leaving an X in its place.
46640, divide by 2607, hopefully it's 4495 right?
Wrong. It's 17.890295. This would be the jpeg's number. the 25 before was the small mp3's.
But maybe it's wrong? We'll go the other way this time. throw out the 10.
11718465 divide by 4664
2512.535377. No where *near* 17. This is the bitmap's number.
(you want to find the other mp3's number? we can do that.)
4309*479 and 58795*30
We threw out 30 last time, we'll get rid of 479 this time. X-ey X-ey baby.
1763850 divide by 4309
409.340914. This is the 55meg odd mp3.
Conclusions:
Small mp3 files stand to lose fewer bytes when zip-compressed. Large mp3s lose many times more.
Following the pattern, jpegs lose even fewer bytes than the slightly larger mp3s. This hints that they all use the same compression, which isn't surprising. They all work together to make mpegs--
However, bitmaps compression significantly better, by about. . . a lot.
A chart:
jpeg: 17
small mp3: 35
large mp3: 409
bitmap: 2512.
Obviously the larger the number, the more bytes you loose.
So, in the scheme of things, for all you rotation sites... is thirty kilobytes (the amount I snagged off an average 4.3 meg mp3) worth the trouble of zipping it, forcing your users to unzip it, and then trudge miserably trying to find it when the incorrect date is shown as a result of the zipping?
No. No.
NO
4491<--4556: saved: 65kb
4542<--4564: saved: 22kb
4497<--4590: saved: 93kb
4534<--4645: saved: 111kb
Apparently bitrate has no/little tailing on this. all of those were 128bps. I tested a 198bps file with a similar size, and it's savings was 99kb.
and now, an apology, honestly, this is 2 AM, and I'm just ticked off at people, so I did this big huge rant. I hold no responsibility for these numbers (which were punched into mIRCs $calc command) or the validity of any statements. But I think they prove themselves. whatever that is^_^
Anyways. Tonight's moral? Don't zip jpegs, mp3s, or probably pngs. Bitmaps and similar are perfectly fine, though, maybe. I dunno.
Someone else finish this:P
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
