image optimizer for web

worse compression in every single version after a21

subash said, on 11/09/2022
a21 - https://web.archive.org/web/20220620190414/https://css-ig.net/pingo

I can understand that You want it to be faster but shouldn't compression be priority for sa and sb?
data set - https://css-ig.net/benchmark/files/
original size - 167041983 bytes

pingo -s9 -strip
pingo -sa -strip
pingo -sb -strip

bytes		version		time

109703258	0.99.5_s9		00:13:32.6781217
108707832	a18_s9		00:13:06.8720775
108707832	a19_s9		00:13:03.0430794
108707832	a20_s9		00:12:48.6439773
108707832	a21_s9		00:12:50.0815966	!!!
108740343	a22_s9		00:12:28.3737962
108740343	a23_s9		00:12:31.4602619
108740343	a25_s9		00:12:47.1652241
108740343	a27_s9		00:12:39.7123578
108740343	a29_s9		00:12:31.2109900
108738617	a30_s9		00:11:45.0842076
108731638	a31_s9		00:11:44.0233618

109634970	0.99.5_sa		00:16:54.2160274
108633290	a18_sa		00:14:53.6743895
108633290	a19_sa		00:14:49.5383801
108633290	a20_sa		00:14:32.8197403
108633290	a21_sa		00:14:32.1896602	!!!
108653565	a22_sa		00:14:18.0382624
108653565	a23_sa		00:14:17.7170599
108653565	a25_sa		00:14:21.3114353
108653565	a27_sa		00:14:25.7362671
108653565	a29_sa		00:14:18.4443228
108652313	a30_sa		00:13:19.3119139
108642288	a31_sa		00:13:20.9105740

109631794	0.99.5_sb		00:16:30.6632470
108635617	a18_sb		00:14:53.9410669
108635617	a19_sb		00:14:55.7861322
108635617	a20_sb		00:14:34.9165932
108635617	a21_sb		00:14:36.7956373	!!!
108655941	a22_sb		00:14:20.5082454
108655941	a23_sb		00:14:21.0950210
108655941	a25_sb		00:14:20.1442632
108655941	a27_sb		00:14:24.9967506
108655941	a29_sb		00:14:20.2458536
108654493	a30_sb		00:13:25.5716031
108652344	a31_sb		00:13:28.2532987
https://web.archive.org/web/20220620190414/https://css-ig.net/pingo pingo -s9 -strip
subash said, on 12/09/2022
a32
slower than a31
compression is better than a31 but still worse than a21

108707832	a21_s9		00:12:50.0815966	!!!
108731638	a31_s9		00:11:44.0233618
108723633	a32_s9		00:12:08.6239117

108633290	a21_sa		00:14:32.1896602	!!!
108642288	a31_sa		00:13:20.9105740
108635435	a32_sa		00:13:44.4733514

108635617	a21_sb		00:14:36.7956373	!!!
108652344	a31_sb		00:13:28.2532987
108646572	a32_sb		00:13:49.6411528
Adreitz said, on 13/09/2022
I am only a user of this project, but the dev seems most interested in compression per unit time. I don't know how he draws the line, but he obviously felt that pingo was using too much time for those extra few bytes per file. Pingo is never going to have the objective best compression. If you want closer to that with an automated tool, you can use ECT instead with --allfilters --pal_sort=120 options. It'll be pretty slow, but will almost always get you better pure compression than Pingo.
subash said, on 14/09/2022
a33
compression is better and faster than a31,a32 and for sa even a21

108707832	a21_s9		00:12:50.0815966	!!!
108731638	a31_s9		00:11:44.0233618
108723633	a32_s9		00:12:08.6239117
108715106	a33_s9		00:11:37.7650711

108633290	a21_sa		00:14:32.1896602
108642288	a31_sa		00:13:20.9105740
108635435	a32_sa		00:13:44.4733514
108626995	a33_sa		00:13:15.5952445	!!!

108635617	a21_sb		00:14:36.7956373	!!!
108652344	a31_sb		00:13:28.2532987
108646572	a32_sb		00:13:49.6411528
108641182	a33_sb		00:13:22.6124541

@Adreitz
"he obviously felt that pingo was using too much time for those extra few bytes per file"
there is nothing about that in his post: https://encode.su/threads/3879-Optimizing-palette-order-for-indexed-png-images?p=75050&viewfull=1#post75050

reply