Graphics

Internet Image Degradation

Do things grow old in cyberspace? The answer is "yes"...

When pictures are constantly copied from website to website, and recompressed and rescaled every time, an interesting loss of quality occurs gradually over time. This page tries to simulate and display this gradual devolution. The first picture is the original.

First someone resized the image to 570 pixels and compressed the image at 54% jpeg quality.

Someone else reduced to a 43 color gif.

Then they added a bit of sharpen because it looked blurry, resized the image to 436 pixels and compressed the image at 43% jpeg quality.

Someone else added a bit of contrast, resized the image to 549 pixels and compressed the image at 65% jpeg quality.

Then someone resized the image to 535 pixels and compressed the image at 42% jpeg quality.

Someone else added a bit of contrast, resized the image to 528 pixels and compressed the image at 44% jpeg quality.

After that, they resized the image to 412 pixels and compressed the image at 48% jpeg quality.

After that, they added a bit of contrast, resized the image to 383 pixels and compressed the image at 18% jpeg quality.

Someone added a bit of sharpen because it looked blurry, resized the image to 359 pixels and compressed the image at 8% jpeg quality.

Then they resized the image to 312 pixels and compressed the image at 18% jpeg quality.

Someone resized the image to 341 pixels and compressed the image at 25% jpeg quality.

Someone else resized the image to 329 pixels, compressed the image at 23% jpeg quality and then they added a bit of contrast, resized the image to 546 pixels and compressed the image at 11% jpeg quality.

Someone else resized the image to 406 pixels, compressed the image at 29% jpeg quality and after that, they resized the image to 395 pixels and compressed the image at 18% jpeg quality.

Then someone resized the image to 519 pixels, compressed the image at 17% jpeg quality and then they resized the image to 370 pixels and compressed the image at 32% jpeg quality.

Then they resized the image to 331 pixels, compressed the image at 29% jpeg quality and then someone resized the image to 496 pixels and compressed the image at 24% jpeg quality.

Someone resized the image to 475 pixels, compressed the image at 13% jpeg quality and after that, they resized the image to 463 pixels and compressed the image at 22% jpeg quality.

Then they added a bit of sharpen because it looked blurry, resized the image to 447 pixels and compressed the image at 28% jpeg quality and someone reduced to a 26 color gif.

Someone else reduced to a 24 color gif and someone resized the image to 546 pixels and compressed the image at 23% jpeg quality.

Someone reduced to a 17 color gif and someone else added a bit of sharpen because it looked blurry, resized the image to 538 pixels and compressed the image at 31% jpeg quality.

After that, they resized the image to 430 pixels, compressed the image at 8% jpeg quality and then they added a bit of sharpen because it looked blurry, resized the image to 492 pixels and compressed the image at 23% jpeg quality.

Finally they resized the image to 560 pixels and compressed the image at 18% jpeg quality.

Oh my, that got pretty bad.

Website by Joachim Michaelis