Collection Pinup Akkonsfw Collection [2025-02-06] [Akko]

Reaper9988

Reaper9988

Active Member
Donor
Sep 25, 2021
542
1,197
LordLegolas said:
yea, this is her anti-piracy strat, spam leakers with heavy pngs :KEK:
if regular subs can't download either, their problem I guess :whistle:
Click to expand...
Actually I wonder what Program is used. The pictures have a bit depth of 64 at 16 per channel in Photoshop there seems to be an extra channel there. Losing that would save like half the size. Also maybe that's just my monitor but I don't see why the pics need to be 16 bit. 8 Bit per channels(so 24 or 32 bit depth ) would bring down the size to about 10% -15% of what is now, without any compression.
Maybe it's really an elaborate scheme :unsure:
 
LordLegolas

LordLegolas

The Lord of the Leaks
Uploader
Aug 6, 2021
5,871
86,596
Reaper9988 said:
Actually I wonder what Program is used. The pictures have a bit depth of 64 at 16 per channel in Photoshop there seems to be an extra channel there. Losing that would save like half the size. Also maybe that's just my monitor but I don't see why the pics need to be 16 bit. 8 Bit per channels(so 24 or 32 bit depth ) would bring down the size to about 10% -15% of what is now, without any compression.
Maybe it's really an elaborate scheme :unsure:
Click to expand...
yea, color depth adds a lot of size, but does nothing on 99.9% of monitors
png to jpg, yes, you will sometimes notice slight lose in colors, but for 60mb into 1mb, totally worth

optimal size for 4k pngs, looking at top artists, is 8-12mb, with 24, max 32 bits.
She does 64, and if I'm not mistaken about how it works, it QUADRUPLES the size, not doubles, without any difference in image quality.

You must be registered to see the links
- x10 size between 64 and 32, but literal ZERO difference across the board

And it's XnConvert, not even Photoshop, Photoshop maybe will do a better job
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reaper9988
Z

ZedGee

Member
Oct 23, 2019
100
99
I used Irfanview and it was still good too. I find what Akkon doing a bit stupid tbh.
 
Reaper9988

Reaper9988

Active Member
Donor
Sep 25, 2021
542
1,197
LordLegolas said:
yea, color depth adds a lot of size, but does nothing on 99.9% of monitors
png to jpg, yes, you will sometimes notice slight lose in colors, but for 60mb into 1mb, totally worth

optimal size for 4k pngs, looking at top artists, is 8-12mb, with 24, max 32 bits.
She does 64, and if I'm not mistaken about how it works, it QUADRUPLES the size, not doubles, without any difference in image quality.

Quick example with Helen pic - x10 size between 64 and 32, but literal ZERO difference across the board

And it's XnConvert, not even Photoshop, Photoshop maybe will do a better job
Click to expand...
Oh I notice colour differences there, but that's because XnConvert lost the colour management Profile and Imageglass(my usual viewer) uses it. In Photoshop it looks the same(Uses my monitors colour setting).
By that I noticed it uses a Gimp Colour Profile so my thinking it's just rendered out without any postwork is a no, must have been used in Gimp at some point.

So just for giggles here is one at 32 bit with (useless Alpha channel) and colour profile in Gimp.
And one 24 bit no colour profile from Photoshop.
Just to be fair I even turned on HDR(And I hate HDR) and no difference either. Would be the wrong file type anyways.
It's really a bit silly for their Patrons hard drives too.

And yeah I see no difference in the JPG either just a tick from me that I like things uncompressed if possible lol
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: LordLegolas
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom