At what point does using a vector SVG is worse than raster image? Level of image complexit, requiring a ton of path elements? the Twitter logo can be create in basically 2 path elements. What if my logo is much more complex? Is there a threshold at the complexity of my image results in an SVG payload > than a properly compressed raster image?
Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
21–30 of 121 posts
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#22At what point does using a vector SVG is worse than raster image? Level of image complexit, requiring a ton of path elements? the Twitter logo can be create in basically 2 path elements. What if my logo is much more complex? Is there a threshold at the complexity of my image results in an SVG payload > than a properly compressed raster image?
I would guess, though, that if you make a logo that is larger as an SVG than a compressed raster, you’ve probably made a bad logo. Logos should be simple.
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#23In case anyone else was suspicious of the 20k file size for a 512x512 PNG with essentially two colors - it's way off. I dropped it into Photoshop and exported as PNG and it spit out an identical file that weighs in at 6k.
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#24In case anyone else was suspicious of the 20k file size for a 512x512 PNG with essentially two colors - it's way off. I dropped it into Photoshop and exported as PNG and it spit out an identical file that weighs in at 6k.
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#25Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#26So small it will take you 20 seconds to count on an Abacus.
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#27EDIT: I mean the table.
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#28Also, if you can avoid it, don't use https://github.com/ivanvotti/font-awesome-svg/tree/master/SV...
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#29But why , when I zoom in with my browser (using Ctrl-+) on that page, the icons don't look sharp? EDIT: I mean the table.
Re: Super Tiny Website Logos in SVG
#30At what point does using a vector SVG is worse than raster image? Level of image complexit, requiring a ton of path elements? the Twitter logo can be create in basically 2 path elements. What if my logo is much more complex? Is there a threshold at the complexity of my image results in an SVG payload > than a properly compressed raster image?
Yes, you can make an image that compresses to a smaller raster image vs. SVG, and complexity is a good way to do that. Especially possible if your image/logo isn’t just solid colors, but contains gradients or textures. I would guess, though, that if you make a logo that is larger as an SVG than a compressed raster, you’ve probably made a bad logo. Logos should be simple.
Agreed. Simple but important things to also consider with Logos include "What does it look like if printed in black and white?" It's a bit outdated advice in some regards, based as much on letter headers, fax machines, and news print adverts, as anything else. You'll notice that almost all memorable logos work really well in black and white, though.