Let's say I have a 1 mb JPG image file that I need to make a minor edit to and re-save.
For the editing, I can use photshop or gimp.
For compression, I can use photoshop, gimp, and any of those online tools such as tinyjpg, jpegmini, etc.
I'm wondering what is the best process to save and compress a JPG edited in photoshop/gimp for the web to preserve the most amount of quality while lowering the filesize to a reasonable size (which in my opinion would probably be around 200kb or lower for a 1mb jpg image)?
For example, am I better off saving/compressing the JPG image in Gimp/photoshop at the highest quality number that doesn't cause an actual increase over the original jpg filesize -- which would be about 95+ in GIMP and 100 in Photoshop) and then running the image afterwards through an presumably more optimized/lossless compression tool like TinyJPG, or is it better to simply reduce the image to a quality number that creates the desired filesize I want in Photoshop/Gimp?
In other words, is it more efficient to save a JPG image in Gimp/Photoshop to your desired filesize or to save the JPG file at a maximum quality setting in GIMP/Photoshop and to then run it through an online tool that is presumably better at compression-optimzation than Gimp/Photoshop?
The latter seems like it would be the better option, but I know every time you tamper with a JPG you get degradation, so that extra step of using an online tool might actually be the worse option.