GTMetrix results worse after image optimisation

  • Resolved Charlie

    (@charliemariephoto)


    4 years, 2 months ago

    Hi there,

    I don’t actually know who this issue will sit with, so I’m reaching out to you as a first step as I have your plugin installed.

    I run a stock photo membership site and therefore trying to keep my site fast is an ongoing challenge. I have premium WP managed hosting with Flywheel, and my image files are stored on the Amazon cloud, with only the watermarked ‘display’ versions stored on the WordPress site.

    Those images are compressed by your plugin I believe, but I didn’t optimise them before uploading. In the ongoing goal of making sure everythings as fast as possible, I’ve been advised to optimise all images before uploading using tinyjpg.com

    I am new and easily confused by image optimisation, but essentially I am running the watermarked image through tinyjpg first before uploading, and then after uploading I delete the old image version, and I believe I have set up your plugin to further compress the image.

    Hopefully so far so good. The issue is, before I do this with a collection, I run a sample product page through GTMetrix before and after, so I can see if it’s made a difference.

    I’ve been doing this for a few months now, and every single time, it’s worse after I optimise the images. I have no idea why. As an example, this was a recent comparison:

    Before: 83% score 5.4s full load time 2.16MB page size
    After: 78% score 5.6s full load time 2.23MB page size

    Nothing else about the images or page has changed, it’s simply been run through tinyjpg first. And I can see on my computer the file size of the new image is significantly smaller than what was on there before.

    Interestingly, in the advise section, beforehand it didn’t advise image optimisation, and afterwards it did! Suggesting the images are worse after than before.

    I’ve checked the WP Optimise images section to see if there’s any that haven’t been compressed, and there’s none there.

    So in a nutshell, I’m confused – could you help with this? Or do you know where to go?

    Thank you.

    I’ve downloaded reports I can send you from GT metrix if required.

    The page I need help with: [log in to see the link]

Viewing 8 replies - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

  • @charliemariephoto Can you please try to enable “Automatically compress newly-added images” and set the compression option to custom with maximum compression enabled?

    Thread Starter Charlie

    (@charliemariephoto)

    Hi

    That setting is already enabled.

    It’s important the compression option is set to prioritise retention of detail as it’s an image library and therefore the visual quality is important.

    That’s how it’s always been set though, so I don’t know why adding further optimisation before uploading seems to make it worse?

    The suggestion after doing this advises to optimise all the images losslessly – but that should have already been done by your plugin? And the preview GTMetrix provides of the optimised image is awful in quality.

    Hope that makes sense

    Charlie

    Thread Starter Charlie

    (@charliemariephoto)

    hi, just chasing a response to my last reply!

    Hi Charlie,

    Sorry for the delay in responding. Could you share the GTMetrix reports as you offered?

    There are a couple of things to note when it comes to image optimization in WordPress.

    First, when optimizing an image before uploading only the original image is compressed. All the sub-sizes (smaller resolutions) usually used in the content will not be compressed by default, because of the way they are generated by WordPress.

    In your case, this is where WP-Optimize is useful, as it will compress those images. And if the original image is already smaller than the result of the new compression, the smaller version will be kept.

    As to why GT-Metrix is reporting worse after than before, I can’t tell without seeing the reports.

    And the preview GTMetrix provides of the optimised image is awful in quality.

    Performance tools such as GTMetrix give advise to make things as performant as possible. But in some cases, compromises have to be made to keep quality and functionality relevant.

    A possibility, which WP-Optimize will implement in the future, is to use a plugin that converts the JPG files to WEBP. In most cases, WEBP enables you to preserve quality while getting a comparatively very small file size.

    Marc.

    Thread Starter Charlie

    (@charliemariephoto)

    Hi there

    Thanks for that explanation! I do have the image compression turned on for the plugin, so essentially I’m uploading an optimised original, and then your plugin should be optimising the rest.

    Here’s a report of a typical page with typical page speeds:

    https://gtmetrix.com/reports/members.tideandtree.com/OdAHQvaM

    Any help/tips/input would be much appreciated!

    Charlie

    Thread Starter Charlie

    (@charliemariephoto)

    Hi! Just checking you got my reply to your last message?
    Thanks
    Charlie

    Hi Charlie,

    Sorry, I missed your previous reply.
    It’s hard to know why there is such a difference without having both reports to compare.

    One thing to note:

    Looking at the page used for the report, only one image is visible (the product). But GTmetrix shows 8-10 other images.

    In the source code of the page, I see that there is a “related products” section, with several images being loaded, which is hidden:

    Is this done on purpose? If so, you could deactivate that section completely.
    If not, you may want to investigate why it’s not showing.

    Marc.

    Thread Starter Charlie

    (@charliemariephoto)

    Ahhh thank you for pointing that out. I added in that css code ages ago when i was just learning about my site! I’ve spoken to woocommerce and got the code to stop it loading rather than just hiding it.

    Fingers crossed that makes a difference!

    Thanks for your help ??

Viewing 8 replies - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • The topic ‘GTMetrix results worse after image optimisation’ is closed to new replies.