0Testing new image compression tools

I’ve been using EWWW image optim­iser to com­press all of my JPEG and PNG images on this site for sev­er­al years. EWWW makes use of OptiPng and PngOut and whilst these are power­ful tools there are altern­at­ives out there now that I wanted to test and com­pare.

I am aware of new­er image formats that may offer smal­ler sizes but until they are broadly sup­por­ted we will have to con­tin­ue to work with PNG and JPEG.

I have already seen some com­par­is­ons show­ing some impress­ive per­form­ance by some oth­er formats but I wanted to test this for myself with my real­world images. Based on the claims presen­ted I decided to start with Pingo and see how much it reduced the size of my total image lib­rary.

There are 3549 images which are a mix of PNGs, JPEGs, and Webp files and range in size from over 1000×1000 pixels to small thumb­nails of 60×60 pixels.


Ori­gin­al116Mb (121,848,736 bytes)
After Pingo113Mb (118,310,160 bytes)

3505 images were pro­cessed in 434 seconds which is impress­ively quick com­pared to the pre­vi­ous tools I’ve used. How­ever, only 3455kb (3.37mb) was saved which is a 2.5% sav­ing.

Des­pite the lack of reduc­tion, I will still be look­ing to migrate to pingo as it is vastly faster than the tools used by EWWW and achieves effect­ively the same res­ult


Ori­gin­al116Mb (121,848,736 bytes)
After Pingo94Mb (98,133,668 bytes)

Lossy com­pres­sion was much more impress­ive in size reduc­tion with a 22.6Mb (19%) reduc­tion but this is to be expec­ted as my pre­vi­ous tools were not using lossy com­pres­sion. I had decided in advance that a sig­ni­fic­ant reduc­tion would be needed for me to con­sider using lossy com­pres­sion. This reduc­tion is right on the bor­der­line. The ulti­mate decision comes down to how much the smal­ler dimen­sion (more often served) images saved — the major­ity of the sav­ings were with ori­gin­al images not with the smal­ler images so I’m not per­suaded that the reduc­tion is worth­while at this point, espe­cially as I already serve webp images to over 50% of vis­it­ors and these gained the least

The next step is to fig­ure out how to auto­mate the pro­cess with pingo which isn’t sup­por­ted by EWWW.

Please send us your thoughts by commenting below! If you would like to subscribe please use the subscribe link on the menu at the top right. You can also share this with your friends by using the social links below. Cheers.

Leave a Reply