compression

The best image compression tools

Feb 042013

You’ve probably already made sure to choose the appropriate format for each image as well as keeping its size (in pixels) to a minimum. Maybe you’ve reduced the JPEG quality setting as much as you can. (Although if you’re not quite confident in your knowledge of the fundamentals then the Designer’s Guide to Image Compression may help.)

The unfortunate reality is that, no matter how carefully you design your images, the graphics tool you’re using will not save the finished files in the most efficient way. And so passing those images through a compression tool can reduce their size considerably.

Exactly how much you can save is tricky to say for sure as it depends very much on your source graphics. Some JPGs may only drop by 50-100 bytes. It’s not unusual for regular web graphics to be compressed by 10-40%, though, with no loss of image quality (and lossy compression techniques, perhaps reducing colours or reencoding JPEGs can cut file sizes even more).

Which programs are the best, then? Good question. To help provide an answer we’ve pitched 18 of the top contenders against each other.

MORE: The best image compression tools

Does “Mastered for iTunes” matter to music? Ars puts it to the test

interface, Internet News, Tech News 467 Responses »

May 012012

Some musicians and record executives have recently bemoaned the fact that what ends up on a fans iPod or iPhone is of arguably much lower quality than what is laid down on tape or hard drives in the studio. While some players in the industry have pushed for higher resolution downloads, Apples current solution involves adhering to long-recognized—if not always followed—industry best practices, along with an improved compression toolchain that squeezes the most out of high-quality master recordings while still producing a standard 256kbps AAC iTunes Plus file.

Shepard applauded Apples technical guidelines, which encourage mastering engineers to use less dynamic range compression, to refrain from pushing audio levels to the absolute limit, and to submit 24/96 files for direct conversion to 16/44.1 compressed iTunes Plus tracks. However, he doubted that submitting such high quality files would result in much difference in final sound quality. Shepards conclusions led CE Pro to claim that Mastered for iTunes is nothing more than “marketing hype.”

So, we set out to delve deeper into the technical aspects of Mastered for iTunes. We also attempted to do some of our own testing to see if there was any difference—good or bad—to be had from following the example of Masterdisk.

SOURCE: Does “Mastered for iTunes” matter to music? Ars puts it to the test.