I have to admit I don't think it's visually very appealing like that. It looks more like some sort of error/ glitch. Maybe my old Firefox does it weirdly?
(The linked web app doesn’t work on mobile in portrait mode, sorry!)
The biggest issue with this trick is that different engines calculate the filters differently, thus turning an okay-ish image into something that looks like a glitch.
If we could get jbig2 native support in browsers we could do monochrome black and white images at ridiculously small file sizes.
A page of sheet music can be as small as 8kb. I'm using a wasm decoder right now, but I could forsee using css filters after the fact to make it look less sharp and aliased
I'd love to see a live preview of the final file size that updates as you change the parameters, maybe debounced by 100ms or so. Although as others mentioned, is this actually proper dithering, seems like the effect of dithering without actually doing it?
It is so wild that this got shared, as I was working on a project that very specifically was hoping to integrate a feature like this. Psyched to try it, I’ll credit the author in the credits of the site I’m building.
While I appreciate the retro aesthetic effect some blogs and sites use in dithering photographic images, I just don't think it works well on the modern web.
People are using too many different device sizes and device resolutions. Look at an image on a small mobile screen and it's basically converted back to grayscale. Or make the dithering so coarse that it still looks dithered on a phone screen, and it just looks horribly blocky and unclear on a desktop.
Wow, my first post that's frontpaged and it's the one I put the least effort into. I've at least fixed the noise colour bleed now.
This technique does not do any file compression as it's a transformation applied to the image in the browser (though screenshots of the output would be smaller than the source)
20 comments
[ 4.1 ms ] story [ 44.7 ms ] threadI have dabbled with some dithering algorithms and while this is way faster than my naive js implementations, this looks pretty bad
(The linked web app doesn’t work on mobile in portrait mode, sorry!)
The biggest issue with this trick is that different engines calculate the filters differently, thus turning an okay-ish image into something that looks like a glitch.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/SVG/Reference/E...
A page of sheet music can be as small as 8kb. I'm using a wasm decoder right now, but I could forsee using css filters after the fact to make it look less sharp and aliased
https://www.wsj.com/articles/whats-in-a-hedcut-depends-how-i...
People are using too many different device sizes and device resolutions. Look at an image on a small mobile screen and it's basically converted back to grayscale. Or make the dithering so coarse that it still looks dithered on a phone screen, and it just looks horribly blocky and unclear on a desktop.
This technique does not do any file compression as it's a transformation applied to the image in the browser (though screenshots of the output would be smaller than the source)
For a post on CSS-based noise dithering that I actually polished, there's also https://ikesau.co/blog/making-a-grainy-spotlight-effect-with...