The Best Image Optimization Tool but still not Perfect

  • I’ve literally used almost all image optimization tool out there and TinyJPG/PNG guys are the best in this category. I’ve tried EWWW, Imgfy and a lot of other things and no one stand a chance in front of Tiny PNG guys in terms of image quality and optimization standards.

    Ofcourse you have to pay money after 500 optimization, but trust me each penny worth it considering the quality of optimization you are getting.

    But there are still 2 things that I am not 100% satisfied about.

    1. This plugin only optimizes the images uploaded via wordpress media tool. But there are still plenty images left to be optimized. Especially the images that comes within theme folder or plugin folder. In EWWW – there was an option to auto scan for these images and optimize them respectively and also an option to mention certain path (eg. your theme folder and plugin folder) path which the plugin will scan and optimize the images respectively. It would be great if you guys consider adding this option in this plugin.
    2. Another thing that I’m not completely happy about is that even though TinyPNG optimized the images properly, but still webpagetest.org sometimes shows that some images can be optimized further by 0.2kb to 0.3kb. It kind a feel bad.

    I hope the dev of this plugin & TinyPNG take these feedback seriously and make the changes on the system respectively.

Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • Plugin Author TinyPNG

    (@tinypng)

    Hi,

    Thanks for the positive review and the valuable feedback!

    Your first point is a interesting one. You’re correct that themes and other plugins can certainly use assets that are not optimised. I will surely put this on the list of ideas to implement, but I can’t promise you anything yet. In any case, great feedback!

    In regards to your second point, our service tries to find an optimal balance between file size and quality. In many cases images could certainly be made even smaller, but also at the cost of quality. Other than that, if it’s really only 0.2-0.3kb of difference then it won’t have a noticeable effect on the loading speed of your website.
    We’re always looking to improve our compression algorithms, so we would certainly appreciate it if you could send us examples when you come across images that are optimised poorly. Poorly here meaning a big difference between what our service creates and what you would expect it to create.

    Thread Starter iSaumya

    (@isaumya)

    Hi thanks for your reply. I would really appreciate if you guys add the feature I mentioned in the 1st point a little early than waiting for months and years.

    About the second point, take a look at this: https://www.webpagetest.org/result/160229_ZZ_GTP/1/performance_optimization/#compress_images

    Hope this helps…

    Plugin Author TinyPNG

    (@tinypng)

    Hi Saumya,

    I understand that it’s important for you.
    We generally decide to implement those features that are most requested by users using our service. As far as I can see, you are the first one who suggested this, so I can’t make any promises yet. In any case, I’ve added it to the list of ideas. Thanks again!

    I think that the webpagetest.org result that you shared can give you a wrong impression on your web page performance in regards to the “Compress Images” part. You indeed get 73/100 for images, but those are only for the very small images (2-3KB each). The bigger images (even though they are not optimised with TinyPNG because they are webp) are not taken into account.
    Note also that since there is so little to gain with such small images, it’s not easily worth it for us to invest more time and money into optimising those small images even better.

    I hope that explains things sufficiently!

Viewing 3 replies - 1 through 3 (of 3 total)
  • The topic ‘The Best Image Optimization Tool but still not Perfect’ is closed to new replies.