Ancestors

Written by Zach Leatherman :11ty: on 2025-01-22 at 15:37

A few Eleventy build server image optimization tests for the project I’m currently working on (×1088 images):

formats: webp, auto =>

❄️ cold cache: 4m 33s

🔥 warm cache: 36s

formats: avif, webp, auto =>

❄️ cold cache: 11m 32s

🔥 warm cache: 38s

Do y’all think the AVIF build cost is worth it if the build server cache is ~always warm?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from zachleat@zachleat.com

Written by Kornel on 2025-01-22 at 15:54

@zachleat Yeah. You should be getting better quality, sharper color.

Number of browsers that support WebP but not AVIF is shrinking, so maybe save some time by dropping the WebP alternative?

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kornel@mastodon.social

Written by Michelle Barker on 2025-01-22 at 16:23

@kornel @zachleat In case it affects your opinion, @fershad wrote about the relative power consumption of different image formats a while back: https://fershad.com/writing/power-consumption-jpeg-webp-and-avif/. Based on those findings I wouldn’t want to drop WebP. Things might’ve changed since then though.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from michelle@front-end.social

Toot

Written by Kornel on 2025-01-22 at 16:55

@michelle @zachleat @fershad I don't think this should affect anyone's decision about use on regular web pages. The energy usage in absolute terms is too tiny to matter, even multiplied by millions it's still small.

But from overall energy efficiency perspective you should also consider that larger files will use relatively more energy on all the network equipment that sends them.

Computers and displays also use energy while waiting for a page to load. Faster pages reduce wasted time.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from kornel@mastodon.social

Descendants

Written by Zach Leatherman :11ty: on 2025-01-23 at 22:33

@kornel @michelle @fershad fwiw I went with your advice and I’m using avif, auto for now!

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from zachleat@zachleat.com

Written by fershad on 2025-01-24 at 12:36

@kornel @michelle @zachleat @eeeps thanks for this conversation. I understand the comments about the network energy, especially for radio networks, I didn't test that segment because:

1. There's no reliable means to measure it

2. Network energy is (as far as I know) pretty constant https://fershad.com/writing/website-carbon-beyond-data-transfer/#data-transfer-network-energy-usage

Eric's points on encoding are very valid, as is Kornel's point about efficiency. Both should be measured further in a more end-to-end kinda test scenario.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from fershad@indieweb.social