Investigate gains from optimizing uploaded image formatting, etc.

[punchagan]

Based on a Yelp blog post mentioned here, we'd like to see if changing how images are uploaded/served gives us enough gains to spend time and effort on this.

[punchagan]

• Yelp seems to have about a 30% reduction in file sizes after applying a bunch of to images. It doesn't look like that will be much, even on the project directory page for RSR.
  Assuming there are 10 projects and on an average each image is 5kb, the total size of the images is 50kb, and a 30% reduction would be 35kb. It doesn't seem like too large a gain, given we also have caching enabled for images.

• Some of the project thumbnails seem to be pngs when jpegs should be good enough. The pngs are about 10 times the size of the jpegs. This is a total waste for thumbnails, where perceiving any quality difference is even harder.

• jpegs mostly seem to be progressive, but if they are not, converting them to a progressive jpeg would make the site "feel" more responsive.

[punchagan]

• [ ] Convert existing pngs to jpegs
• [ ] Ensure all future pngs get converted to jpgs. Should we do that for organisation logos, or not?

[stale[bot]]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.