The image is visually identical to the earlier post #2560213 upload. Why is this marked as the parent?
It's better compressed and has slightly more metadata. But really, there's just a general rule of pixiv being the parent to twitter, since the latter horribly recompresses. With png like this it's just a needlessly bigger filesize, but with jpg there's an actual huge quality difference.
It's better compressed and has slightly more metadata. But really, there's just a general rule of pixiv being the parent to twitter, since the latter horribly recompresses. With png like this it's just a needlessly bigger filesize, but with jpg there's an actual huge quality difference.
Yup. I'm actually waiting on just two approvals for higher quality png parents of pool #11805: gurande_(g-size) status:pending. Grande has a habit of re-uploading higher quality versions of most of the images off his twitter to pixiv, so I went through this and checked which ones didn't have a parent, SauceNAO'd those ones, and if I found something I re-upped it and set the twitter sourced image as a child to it. It does bother me slightly that he doesn't do this for every image, but he does do it regularly for his Weekly Grande series.
I assume the way Twitter recompresses images is more for speed, since Twitter has to do tons upon tons of service everyday. They sacrifice some quality for that.
EDIT: Whoa, that search messed up. Edited in internal link instead.
It's better compressed and has slightly more metadata. But really, there's just a general rule of pixiv being the parent to twitter, since the latter horribly recompresses. With png like this it's just a needlessly bigger filesize, but with jpg there's an actual huge quality difference.
Right, Makes sense. With how Twitter handles jpgs I usually upload from there only if it's a png.
I think it's fine to upload jpgs from twitter, just as long as they're not horribly artifacted (although this is probably more the fault of the original artist than anything) or have any other sort of strange defect. For some artists (e.g. nakajima ryou), that's all we get. Other times, it might just be a matter of wanting to see the image regardless of if the compression or metadata is bad.
Although there is a discernible difference between jpg and png in terms of visual quality, Twitter, again, as ☆♪ has said, recompresses jpg horribly (and adds junk metadata to png). Sometimes you get some glaring visual artifacts from whatever they use.
Leave a comment