dont save as jpegs

>>19058173
most camera apps dont even let u save as png by default anymore,

u have to get a new software from appstore
(my experience)

Because saving photos or antialiased text in vector or raw is smart as fuck. Kill yourself, data whore.

>JPGs
they take up less space. the average person doesn't care
>no offline maps by default anymore
anymore? they never did. besides, there's ten billion issues with offline maps, like them getting out of date, privacy violations, etc
>can't make emergency calls in fuck nowhere
do you know how phone networks work even in the basest of sense?
>compasses
this isn't a feature most people need. besides, if you manage to get stranded in the jungle or mountainside without even the most basic of supplies, you're going to be fucked in more ways than just "my cell phone doesnt have a compass QQ"

3/10 made me reply

>>19058173
Oh hey, it's the shopped praying mantis. So you made this recently? You're doing God's work, my friend.

File: tank_norma2l.png (37KB, 477x160px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 477x160px

you do realize that without compression, file size sky rockets? and that the compression is not the same across the board? jpeg is the standard for photos FOR A REASON. see pic related and i fucking dare you to tell me you can tell the difference with your elf eyes.

I am not sure if I should omg.

>>19060628
Png or jpg

>>19058173
A-are you seriously imply that the reason phone camera's and other shit-tier cameras save as JPG's is a fucking conspiracy?

Nigga, why do you think professional level cameras cost upwards of $600 and can easily run over $1000? Shitty cameras that save in a .jpg format are cheap and easy to make, and on top of that a .png of about 3mb's can easily be around 400kb's if compressed into a .jpg, useful for people who prefer quantity over quality or simply have limited drive space to work with.

It's a compromise for people who want to take pictures but don't want to shell out for a good camera, not a fucking conspiracy, if it was high quality .png format cameras and 64gb SD cards wouldn't even exist.

Uh the shittiness of the photo in OP is not due to compression artefacts from the file type. It's the camera's lens not being good in low light/aperture/ISO settings. You could look at the original in RAW and you'd still see that graininess.

You shouldn't save photos as .png's, the png format is much better at compressing images with limited and flat colours.

Jpg has far more than 32 colours, it has a palette of thousands and jpg compression works by removing details the human eye wouldn't even notice. JPEG files only lose their quality if it's saved over itself many times or you save it as a shit quality jpg to begin with.

There is no distinguishable difference between a high quality jpg image to a png, except its image size is much smaller.

>>19058173

you can embed more into pngs

>>19061601
Also pixels can only display red, green or blue.

Either way, cameras offer this compression so you can fit more on your device and to also improve the aesthetic of the photo with enhanced colour correction, contrast and sharpening during a save.

You can probably change it so it shoots in RAW so you can see the original output. The shittiness of the photo comes down to the lens in the end, and a lens on a phone is going to be shit compared to an SLR.

>>19058173
When did smartphones ever save pictures as a .tiff file by default? Those file sizes are huge, no company would do that when we already have more compressed image formats.