The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
1–10 of 104 posts
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#2Even better would be no image for the water tiles and set the background color of the container element.
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#3One thing I've wondered about are size savings for DEM tiles. Typically elevation values are encoded in RGB values giving a resolution down to fractions of an inch [1]. This seems like overkill. With an elevation range from 0 - 8848 meters (Mt everest), you can use just 2 bytes and get an accuracy down to .2 meters. That seems plenty for many uses. Does anybody know if there's a PNG16 format where you can reduce the file size by only using 2 bytes per pixel, instead of the typical 3-byte RGB or 4-byte RGBA?
[1] https://docs.mapbox.com/data/tilesets/guides/access-elevatio...
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#4This is one example where "zopfli" or other optimized zlib compressors don't help, the input data is too simple.
"oxipng" (my current preferred png optimizer) bring a plain 256x256 image created with imagemagick down to 179 bytes, as long as you tell it to strip all metadata objects.
Interlacing doesn't make any difference, it's the same size with it on or off.
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#5Convert to svg maybe?
For OpenStreetMap 136 bytes
http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="256" height="256" viewBox="0 0 256 256">
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#6Convert to svg maybe? For OpenStreetMap 136 bytes http://www.w3.org/2000/svg " width="256" height="256" viewBox="0 0 256 256">
But the PNG provided was 103 bytes :3
Also - pardon my ignorance, this may be a dumb question, is SVG universally supported in browsers these days? I’m not big up on image standards.
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#7Even better would be no image for the water tiles and set the background color of the container element.
That might end up looking weird with a dark-mode extension like Dark Reader.
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#8Convert to svg maybe? For OpenStreetMap 136 bytes http://www.w3.org/2000/svg " width="256" height="256" viewBox="0 0 256 256">
The png is only 103 bytes though. Btw your svg can be decreased by changing viewBox to 0 0 1 1, and also by changing the path to a circle (implicitly positioned at 0, 0)
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#9This is one example where "zopfli" or other optimized zlib compressors don't help, the input data is too simple. "oxipng" (my current preferred png optimizer) bring a plain 256x256 image created with imagemagick down to 179 bytes, as long as you tell it to strip all metadata objects. Interlacing doesn't make any difference, it's the same size with it on or off.
zopflipng takes the 1189 byte file to 103 bytes for me.
Re: The smallest 256x256 single-color PNG file, and where you've seen it (2015)
#10Convert to svg maybe? For OpenStreetMap 136 bytes http://www.w3.org/2000/svg " width="256" height="256" viewBox="0 0 256 256">
The png is only 103 bytes though. Btw your svg can be decreased by changing viewBox to 0 0 1 1, and also by changing the path to a circle (implicitly positioned at 0, 0)
The SVG could also be served with gzip compression.