Hi @softpillow, the original source JPEG's are encoded at 85% quality, standard across the board. However, this may not be the file you see in your browser since we do serve optimized WEBP files if your browser asks for them.

Most browsers have an extension that will let you download the source JPEG. This is one for Chrome as an example. This can let you compare the two versions side by side. Bottom line though, if you're only concerned with JPEG's, they're encoded at 85%.

@travisbell said:

Hi @softpillow, the original source JPEG's are encoded at 85% quality, standard across the board. However, this may not be the file you see in your browser since we do serve optimized WEBP files if your browser asks for them.

How do I know if my browser asks for them (optimized WEBP files)? (eg. Is it based on what type of browser I'm using? eg. chrome vs firefox vs opera vs brave, etc.)

or do i just have to test it out myself and see if images from this site look the same downloaded (source JPEG) vs. viewed on a browser/internet/url?

Pretty much all major browsers today support WEBP, so generally you can just assume that's what you're looking at.

@travisbell said:

Hi @softpillow, the original source JPEG's are encoded at 85% quality, standard across the board. However, this may not be the file you see in your browser since we do serve optimized WEBP files if your browser asks for them.

Most browsers have an extension that will let you download the source JPEG. This is one for Chrome as an example. This can let you compare the two versions side by side. Bottom line though, if you're only concerned with JPEG's, they're encoded at 85%.

oh WOW....

I just tested it (that chrome extension) out with one image I uploaded... the difference is HUGE

So ultimately the actual quality of an image on this site isnt the way it looks when you open it on the browser, but when you download its source JPG? So when it comes to determining what images on the site are low quality or high quality it really should be done by looking at the downloaded source JPG and not how it looks when you just click on it right? In that case unless the mods are downloading the source JPG images when they look at image reports perhaps Ive gotten thousands of good images deleted from this site...

...or should we still judge which images to delete based off the way they look as WEBP?

@travisbell said:

Pretty much all major browsers today support WEBP, so generally you can just assume that's what you're looking at.

do you know if there is an extension or some method for a browser to automatically display the source JPG instead of the WEBP?

or is the best way to just use one of the browsers in that link you provided with a red color to it? (eg. Chrome 4-8, Edge 12-17)

Unfortunately, I do not know. The way this works for browsers is that they set a value in the accept header saying what image formats they support. Modern browsers are designed for performance, so they always lean towards doing whatever is most performant. This is why they choose WEBP over JPEG. What you would be looking for is an extension (or setting) that lets you change the default accept header for images. I did a quick Google and found this from 2017. Maybe parts of it are still valid?

is the best way to just use one of the browsers in that link you provided with a red color to it? (eg. Chrome 4-8, Edge 12-17)

I doubt you'll be able to use browsers that old, Chrome 8 is from 2010. Edge 17 is from 2018, and I'd be surprised if you'd even be able to install it.