Thanks - I downloaded that zip file (460MB!) and extracted one of the examples into a Gist: https://gist.github.com/simonw/5a8054f18f9ea3c560b628b16b00f...

Here's an original: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/simonw/5a8054f18f9ea3c560...

And the jpegli-q95- version: https://gist.githubusercontent.com/simonw/5a8054f18f9ea3c560...

And the same thing with mozjpeg-a95 https://gist.githubusercontent.com/simonw/5a8054f18f9ea3c560...

You shouldn't compare the same quality setting across encoders as it's not standardized. You have to compare based on file size.

They're far too high quality to tell anything. There's no point comparing visually lossless images (inb4 "I am amazing and can easily tell...").

Right? I had all 3 open and quickly flipped over them saw no difference. Maybe I'm just uncultured.

What are the file sizes for those two?

The zip file doesn't have the originals, just the PNGs.

Edit: I'm dumb.

I would hope the jpegs compress better than png does.

Perhaps try quality settings in the 70 range, and comparable output file sizes. 95 will be high-quality by definition.

There are some 70s and 65s in the gist: https://gist.github.com/simonw/5a8054f18f9ea3c560b628b16b00f...

You said linked but like a fool I went looking for a zip in the repository. This is the link:

https://cloudinary.com/labs/cid22/mucped23.zip (460MB)

I can't blame you, my comment originally didn't have the word "linked", I edited that in after I realized the potential misunderstanding. Maybe you saw it before the edit. My bad.

Ha ha! No worries. I thought it had changed but I frequently skim read and miss things so I wasn't sure.