Save As vs Save for Web


Status
Not open for further replies.
V

vince123123

Guest
#1
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!
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#2
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.
 

Peano

New Member
Jul 30, 2008
200
0
0
Washington, D.C.
www.radiantpics.com
#3
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.
 

V

vince123123

Guest
#4
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.

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.
 

Octarine

Moderator
Staff member
Jan 3, 2008
12,543
33
48
Pasir Ris
#5
Have you check image size and resolution settings for both output files?
 

V

vince123123

Guest
#6
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.
 

zac08

Senior Member
Feb 21, 2005
11,755
0
0
East
#7
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... :dunno::dunno:
 

sjackal

Senior Member
Jul 9, 2008
4,491
10
38
#8
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.
 

tSkye

New Member
Nov 8, 2005
989
0
0
Farrer Park
#9
My guess is the Exif data located in the file is removed and the colours are set to Web sRGB.

may be wrong thou
 

st3ven

New Member
Dec 22, 2008
53
0
0
Singapore
www.flickr.com
#10
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:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom