> a lossless format [is] pretty much pointless for photos
Why is that? Every edit you make to that photo means that the photo will degrade in quality. I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?
> I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?
Sure JPEG artefacts are bad, but that can be mitigated (stop compressing so much). Your photos being an order of magnitude larger is worse, and inherent to the way PNG works.
The compromise is that with lossy compression, you can significantly shear the filesize used for retrieval, which granted isn't an issue of speed (but still is for bandwidth consumption).
Why is that? Every edit you make to that photo means that the photo will degrade in quality. I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?