What is the effect of encoding an image in base64?

The Impact of Base64 Encoding on Images

Explore the effects of encoding images in Base64, including file size, performance implications, and practical use cases in web development.

Base64 encoding is a method of representing binary data (like images) in an ASCII string format. While it offers certain advantages, such as embedding images directly into HTML or CSS, it also comes with trade-offs, particularly concerning file size and performance. Understanding these effects is crucial for making informed decisions in web development and other applications.

What is Base64 Encoding?

Base64 is a group of binary-to-text encoding schemes that represent binary data in an ASCII string format by translating it into a radix-64 representation. It's commonly used when there's a need to encode binary data that needs to be stored and transferred over media that are designed to deal with text. For images, this means converting the raw pixel data into a long string of characters.

flowchart TD
    A[Binary Image Data] --> B{"Base64 Encoder"}
    B --> C[Base64 Encoded String]
    C --> D{"Text-based Medium (e.g., HTML, CSS, JSON)"}
    D --> E{"Base64 Decoder"}
    E --> F[Original Binary Image Data]
    style A fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px
    style F fill:#f9f,stroke:#333,stroke-width:2px

Simplified Base64 Encoding and Decoding Process for Images

File Size Increase

One of the most significant effects of Base64 encoding an image is the increase in file size. Base64 encoding represents 3 bytes of binary data with 4 bytes of ASCII characters. This means that a Base64 encoded image will be approximately 33% larger than its original binary form. For example, a 10KB PNG image will become roughly 13.3KB when Base64 encoded. This overhead can accumulate quickly, especially with many or large images.

<img src="" alt="Red dot">

<style>
  .icon {
    background-image: url("");
    width: 16px;
    height: 16px;
  }
</style>

Examples of Base64 encoded images embedded directly in HTML and CSS.

Performance and HTTP Requests

The primary performance benefit of Base64 encoding images is the elimination of additional HTTP requests. When an image is embedded as a Base64 string, it becomes part of the main HTML, CSS, or JavaScript file. This means the browser doesn't need to make a separate request to fetch the image, which can reduce network latency and overhead, especially for small images or when many small images are used. However, this benefit diminishes rapidly with larger images due to the increased overall file size of the main document.

sequenceDiagram
    participant Browser
    participant Server

    Browser->>Server: Request HTML (with Base64 image)
    Server-->>Browser: Send HTML (includes image data)
    Note over Browser: Browser parses HTML and renders image

    Browser->>Server: Request HTML (with external image)
    Server-->>Browser: Send HTML (with image URL)
    Browser->>Server: Request Image (separate HTTP request)
    Server-->>Browser: Send Image Data
    Note over Browser: Browser parses HTML and renders image after fetching

Comparison of HTTP requests for Base64 vs. external images

Caching and Maintainability

Base64 encoded images are not cached independently by the browser. If the containing HTML or CSS file changes, the entire file (including the embedded image) must be re-downloaded. This contrasts with external images, which can be cached separately and reused across multiple pages or sessions without re-downloading. From a maintainability perspective, embedding images as long Base64 strings can make code harder to read, edit, and debug, especially for developers not accustomed to such formats.