>> |
Anonymous
OP here >>243028
Well, big GB set's like your Kanojo rip are definitely what's popular; no 'right or wrong', just based on preferences. And it's not hard to convert .BMP's to .jpg's either, so it's always better to start HQ and have the option to compress to one's preference/need, rather than getting lower quality that your stuck with it.
For select games I really enjoy the art of, I'll keep large, 'lossless' .BMP/.PNG sets (I believe one of my older Atelier K hospital games CG clocks in at 30+Gig's by itself). As I've saved hundreds of CG sets over the years, even with ton's of hard-drive/storage space, the issue, to me personally, was sort of like you describing 'declining benefits' of that last 5% of .jpg compression. To use an old tech comparison, it's like evaluating standard video connection, s-video, and component cables. You'll notice a huge, obvious gap between the first two, and comes down to discerning taste between the second and third. A highly compressed .jpg set (with pics averaging 50-90kb) will yield noticeably ugly results. Faded colors, blurring between the line borders, etc. A solid, 95% .jpg set will have some artifacts, but it usually has vibrant colors and is light years ahead of the former in 'cleanness'. Just on ease of viewing/storage, for sets that weren't my favorite, the differences between a good .jpg pic (usually 150+kb avg.) vs lossless 1.5+MB per-pic .BMP/.PNG's were negligible to me. The good .jpg's are clean and clear, and save a ton of room in my already massive collection.
So again, all simply comes down to personal taste. How much do you like the set, how much space do you have, how often are you going to view it, etc.
|