A quick test of one image using various methods of compression to find the optimal image size for blog posts.
I’ve done this test a few times, with different images in the past. There is never one result fits all. Because each individual image has its own characteristics which affect the compression amounts. If you’re really trying to find the best of the best – with just one method. It won’t work. It’s best to find the most efficient method, that fits the majority of images. That way, you reduce your workload.
If you’re looking for the perfect score on a page load test. Then sure, you can try all of these methods to find the optimal one. But personally, I’m not sure I’d bother. Life is too short.
All of these methods are using a 2000px long edge image, all are using the ShortPixel Plugin.
Short Answer: “TLDR:”
Export from LR at Quality 70, 2000px long edge, sharpen for screen @ high. Then upload through ShortPixel Image Optimise plugin, Glossy Setting (no loss of quality), set to also create webP and deliver webP in the front end. This gives images that any speed test will be happy with and are also pin sharp without any loss of quality.
Export from Lightroom – Quality 66
Export Lightroom – Quality 66 + JPGmini
Export Lightroom – Quality 70
Export Lightroom – Quality 70 + JPGmini
Export Lightroom – Quality 80
Export Lightroom – Quality 80 + JPGmini
Photoshop – resize to 2000px – export Save for Web Quality 100%
Photoshop – resize to 2000px – export Save for Web Quality 100% + JPGminis
Size Results
Summary of Image Sizes for Web
440kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 66
454kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 66 + JPGmini
452kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 70
432kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 70 + JPGmini
454kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 80
439kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 80 + JPGmini
481kb – Photoshop – resize to 2000px – export Save for Web Quality 100%
448kb – Photoshop – resize to 2000px – export Save for Web Quality 100% + JPGmini
Rearranged in order of Image Size
Smallest Size to Largest
432kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 70 + JPGmini
439kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 80 + JPGmini
440kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 66
452kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 70
454kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 66 + JPGmini
454kb – Export Lightroom – Quality 80
448kb – Photoshop – resize to 2000px – export Save for Web Quality 100% + JPGmini
481kb – Photoshop – resize to 2000px – export Save for Web Quality 100%
As you can see. There isn’t a lot in it. From the smallest file at 432kb to the largest at 481kb, we’re only talking 49kb difference. But that is a 10% saving. For the others, it’s all pretty close. And there’s no clear winner. My personal current setting is Quality 70 (dropped to 66 if a particular image is still too big) and not using JPGmini. I took this approach after reading on the Fuel Your Photos website about Dylan and Corey’s recommendations. From the images I’ve tested so far, I agree with them, that adding JPGmini into the mix, simply isn’t worth it. On a couple of images I tested, it was actually a larger file size when I used JPGmini. So that really decided it for me.
