Neocities

skullmund macrowavent

19 hours ago

skull cave best cave

4 likes

macrowavent 16 hours ago

thank u, you're the best skullpage of all neocities

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

1 month ago

SKULLMUND

4 likes

ourhalations skullmund

1 month ago

This page made me smile

2 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

3 months ago

SKULLMUND

5 likes

xxjebodiahgamingpromlgcoolxx skullmund

3 months ago

i like the explosion

3 likes

skullmund xxjebodiahgamingpromlgcoolxx

3 months ago

what the fun

4 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

3 months ago

SKULLMUND

7 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

4 months ago

SKULLMUND

6 likes

macrowavent 4 months ago

purple again

1 like

skullmund 4 months ago

the spookiest colour

2 likes

skullmund isolvationjoy

4 months ago

skulled as fuck

4 likes

isolvationjoy 4 months ago

skulls for the skull throne

2 likes

skullmund adornesibley

4 months ago

I respectfully (and also disrespectfully) disagree with your fantasized casting of tom cruise playing himself in the nicolas cage extended universe. i believe the sequel should gently introduce the concept that this is a parallel world and that nicolas cage is the only constant among worlds. as such the antagonist should be a fictional superstar (for example played by keith david or charlie sheen)

6 likes

skullmund 4 months ago

also i really want to see glimpses of nicolas cage movies that never were that get increasingly outlandish. like showdown at the grand but with nicolas cage which is the one thing that movie is missing

3 likes

adornesibley 4 months ago

You ALMOST sold me on this idea... just one problem: In the final scene of The Incredible Weight Of Massive Talent, it's mentioned that they chose Demi Moore to play Olivia Cage... who is played by Sharon Horgan in the film. So in this fictional world we have actors who are famous actors (Demi Moore, Nicolas Cage) and actors who are playing characters yeah? So Tom Cruise could TOTALLY play Tom Cruise, just sayin'~ <3

2 likes

skullmund 4 months ago

damn u got me, they messed up on that one

3 likes

skullmund goofyahhbingus

4 months ago

JohnHorns should post on the mund

3 likes

goofyahhbingus 3 months ago

He would cause unspeakable havoc. (> @_@)>

1 like

skullmund dreamcult

6 months ago

hard ticket to hawaii pwns

3 likes

dreamcult 6 months ago

let's hit the jacuzzi

1 like

goatcvlt 4 months ago

absolute 80s cokehead porn producer cinema

katiedoesthings skullmund

7 months ago

i'm smiling looking at this page

2 likes

darkfr0stt skullmund

11 months ago

oh my God your site is so cool and fun I LOVE IT SO MUCHH

2 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

1 year ago

SKULLMUND

7 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

1 year ago

SKULLMUND

6 likes

skullmund goofyahhbingus

1 year ago

regarding lossless compression: Why do you think pngs should be converted to webp? I've made a png compression program and have found pngs to be consistently smaller if compressed well. jxl is best, but theres unfortunately no browser support yet

2 likes

goofyahhbingus 1 year ago

Well, in my tests I've gotten the opposite results, WEBPs being consistently smaller than PNGs. That's quite strange... Could you give me more info on how you compress PNGs? I'm rather curious about it!

2 likes

goofyahhbingus 1 year ago

Oh also some context on my workflow: I save images as PNG, compress them using Minuimus.pl, then I convert them to WEBP using libwebp (command being: cwebp -q 100 -lossless "[file]").

1 like

skullmund 1 year ago

i run optipng pngout and deflopt, theyre all lossless and pretty fast, makes for a small image already. then to shave off a few more bytes i run my own code which (somewhat brute-force) tries to find even better filter combinations / palette order / bit depth (8 might compress better than lower numbers, strange but true) and deflate with zopfli. i'll release it eventually but right now it only "works on my machine"

2 likes

goofyahhbingus 1 year ago

Oh nice, that's interesting. If I'm not mistaken Minuimus.pl internally uses pngout and optipng only. I'll have to check deflopt and zopfli now! And I can't wait for your code release, hoping it'll be open sorce! :))))

1 like

skullmund 1 year ago

i just downloaded libwebp and have to say, webp compresses a lot better now than im used to. some are actually smaller as webps now but the differences are only about 1-5% either way

2 likes

skullmund 1 year ago

i quickly tested 5 files: png is 109.742 bytes total and webp 108.946 although 3 out of 5 files are smaller as pngs. but tbfh the webp compression is nicer and faster

2 likes

skullmund 1 year ago

also tried jxl with the same 5 images and while it performs best on 3/5 images leaving 1/5 for png and 1/5 for webp, it actually has the highest total size because it messes up on the largest image (116.765). so from my quick test they all perform well and theres no clear winner

2 likes

skullmund 1 year ago

having the sizes be so similar makes me wonder which decodes fastest

2 likes

goofyahhbingus 1 year ago

I've also done a few tests myself using your method, and I did get a few PNGs that were better compressed than WEBPs. Maybe it's the way the images' pixels themselves are structured that decides it? Compression sure works in mysterious ways... :)))

1 like

skullmund 1 year ago

idk about the other formats but png applies filters to image rows before compressing with zlib. both steps are non-deterministic to get the optimal result, which is both the fun and the pain of png. heres a simple explanation if youre interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EFUYNoFRHQI

2 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

1 year ago

SKULLMUND

6 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

1 year ago

SKULLMUND

5 likes

skullmund updated SKULLMUND

1 year ago

SKULLMUND

8 likes

Latest Activity > badass

Sites

All the latest Neocities site news!

Popular Tags