jpeg2png VS oxipng

That's not necessarily the case with the jpeg2png decoder, but it's been a while since I used it, and I'm not able to test right now. The PNG files will be smaller than with the usual JPEG decoding process, at least.

This tool optimises blocky JPEGs for a better viewing pleasure: https://github.com/victorvde/jpeg2png

> jpeg2png finds the smoothest possible picture that encodes to the given JPEG file.

I have had good experiences with https://github.com/shssoichiro/oxipng . Although, I suspect this wouldn't give you nearly enough space savings as jpg.

If you do want the file as a PNG (for transparency and a common format that's well supported), but don't want it so huge, consider something like oxipng. https://github.com/shssoichiro/oxipng

oxipng, pngquant and svgcleaner — optimizing images

I wonder how `pngcrush` compares to `oxipng` (https://github.com/shssoichiro/oxipng).

Personally, I use `oxipng` if I want lossless compression. However, most of the time, I use `pngquant` instead, since it gives significant size reduction even at `99%` (I can't even distinguish between the original and reduced image).

    pngquant --quality=99 --ext=.png --force file.png

Depending on your workflow it might make sense to export PNGs directly from Affinity and then reduce their size with a utility like Oxipng, which uses all your cores to find the best algorithm for each particular image.

Assuming your frames are PNG files, you could use a lossless optimizer like optipng to try if their size can be reduced. I prefer oxipng, which is faster and multithreaded, and seems to have more active development.

Not sure what extensions of images you use, but if they’re PNG you could use oxipng: https://github.com/shssoichiro/oxipng