Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Save As vs Save for Web

  1. #1
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Save As vs Save for Web

    Hi,

    I'm having this strange anomaly.

    When doing a Save As, I get a JPG that's around 600k, but when I save for Web, it can go as low as 40k. Both are on highest quality settings.

    I know that Save for Web removes things like EXIF and other extraneous headers, but the difference is rather stark. This is the first time I'm encountering such a big difference.

    Anyone knows why? The image concerned is simply a stylised text on a white background (a logo of sorts).

    Thanks!

  2. #2
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,755

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Its the compression level. When you save for web, the picture is heavily compressed. Also you can set the quality to a lower level and save even more space.

    When you save as, the picture is left as after you have converted it into a jpeg (if you have shot in RAW in the first place) This gives the best picture quality and least loss of picture detail and quality.

    Now in web format, it is generally known that sRGB is the colourspace to use and that you do not need a high level of picture quality as from a printer or printing firm. Thus you can forgo more details and compress the picture more. Esp so if the picture has already be reduced down to a smaller size of say 800 x 600 pixels.
    Michael Lim
    My Flickr Site

  3. #3

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Quote Originally Posted by zac08 View Post
    Its the compression level. When you save for web, the picture is heavily compressed.
    No, that won't account for the differences the OP described.

    Test case. I saved a .psd image four ways:

    1. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile included: 292K

    2. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile omitted: 289K

    3. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile included: 282K

    4. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile omitted: 276K

    Clearly, "Save for web" is not applying a heavy compression compared with "Save as." The difference is about 4% or less.

  4. #4
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Yup that's exactly what I'm saying, my previous experiences have always been as you described.

    But my present case appears to be an anomaly where I get 10x savings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Peano View Post
    No, that won't account for the differences the OP described.

    Test case. I saved a .psd image four ways:

    1. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile included: 292K

    2. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile omitted: 289K

    3. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile included: 282K

    4. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile omitted: 276K

    Clearly, "Save for web" is not applying a heavy compression compared with "Save as." The difference is about 4% or less.

  5. #5
    Moderator Octarine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Pasir Ris
    Posts
    12,390

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Have you check image size and resolution settings for both output files?

  6. #6
    vince123123
    Guests

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Image Size is identical. Both originate from the same PSD file.

    Save for Web will impose a 72 dpi instruction encoding, whilst Save as JPG retains whatever resolution you set in the PSD. Both have the same pixel dimensions regardless of the DPI instruction setting.

  7. #7
    Senior Member zac08's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    East
    Posts
    11,755

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Quote Originally Posted by Peano View Post
    No, that won't account for the differences the OP described.

    Test case. I saved a .psd image four ways:

    1. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile included: 292K

    2. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile omitted: 289K

    3. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile included: 282K

    4. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile omitted: 276K

    Clearly, "Save for web" is not applying a heavy compression compared with "Save as." The difference is about 4% or less.
    Funny thing is that I find tat I get a HUGE difference each time I Save for Web vs Save as...
    Michael Lim
    My Flickr Site

  8. #8

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    It could be due to the fact that its a stylized text image with white background. Thats why the savings in size is great. Maybe something to do with compression setting used by Adobe CS. There could be a large amount of pixels with the same color information. As you know with Tiff format, certain type of compression technique are more efficient for certain type of images. Photos vs graphics, etc.

    Wild guess.
    WTB Manfrotto RC4 L Bracket

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Farrer Park
    Posts
    989

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    My guess is the Exif data located in the file is removed and the colours are set to Web sRGB.

    may be wrong thou

  10. #10

    Default Re: Save As vs Save for Web

    Quote Originally Posted by Peano View Post
    No, that won't account for the differences the OP described.

    Test case. I saved a .psd image four ways:

    1. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile included: 292K

    2. "Save as" at level 12, ICC profile omitted: 289K

    3. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile included: 282K

    4. "Save for web" at 100% quality, profile omitted: 276K

    Clearly, "Save for web" is not applying a heavy compression compared with "Save as." The difference is about 4% or less.

    Try to save as web.. and the file format using Jpg, not PSD ^^
    Last edited by st3ven; 28th February 2009 at 12:05 PM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •