Picture quality and file size compared

Started 4 months ago | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
Humansvillian
Humansvillian Senior Member • Posts: 2,978
Picture quality and file size compared
5

Until recently, Google Photos didn’t count any photos 16mp or less, stored in ordinary Google compression (they reduce your picture’s resolution and file size) against the 15 gigabytes Google gives everybody for free.

I pay a little extra and subscribe to Google One, that allows 200 gigabytes storage.  Bring more money, they’ll sell you more.

And today I just bought a 2TB flash drive for $15.  Hard offline storage is cheap, and getting cheaper.

My New Year’s Resolution is to make more high resolution RAW photographs and store them on hard drives.

But I enjoy very much taking about a thousand photos a month and uploading them to Google Photos through my iPhone by using a dongle.  I believe I can set my phone to ignore the RAW photo and only load the JPEG.

This leaves the question of what picture quality JPEG to take along with my RAW photos.  For purposes of social media and email sharing, less is more.  Gmail has a 25mb file size limit and most social media platforms whack my 16mp Large Normal photos (average file size about 3 mb) down even further.  Larger files transfer slower.  Most monitors my friends own are not even 4K.  One megapixel is likely enough and eight is overkill.

So I shot my trusty and defenseless can of powder, to compare picture quality and file size.

1 mp    189 kb  (Small) Basic

8mp 1.1 mb (Medium)  Basic

16mp 2.3 mb Large Basic

16mp Large Normal 3.3mb

The next settings were Large Fine 7.9 mb Super Fine 9.6mb and the ORF was 16.2 mb

I’ve found it’s impossible to distinguish anything above Normal compression quality on my monitors.   Yes, higher compression quality settings have bigger files to edit, but Normal compression is plenty for Olympus JPEG photos shared on social media and by email.  Basic works well, too.

I was sort of surprised to discover a Large Raw file is nearly a hundred times larger than a Small Basic.

If set to RAW only, my 64GB card delivers 3.427 photos.

Adding a Small Basic only reduces the capacity to 3,378.

My initial thought is that making an extra Medium Basic JPEG  might be the best compromise.  At one mb per file I’d produce about an extra gigabyte a month on my Google storage account, and 8 megapixel was all my Canon 350D shot at full resolution, and the photos still look pretty good to me.

I’ve also about decided I don’t need a newer camera with more resolution.

I’d be better off, buying better glass.

-- hide signature --

Humansville is a town in the Missouri Ozarks

 Humansvillian's gear list:Humansvillian's gear list
Olympus TG-5 Olympus PEN E-PL1 Olympus PEN E-P5 Olympus E-M5 II Olympus 12-40mm F2.8 Pro +17 more
Canon EOS 350D (EOS Digital Rebel XT / EOS Kiss Digital N)
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPrevious
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow