[tatersolid]

Where do you store high quality original images in case future edits or recompression with better codecs are needed? Generation loss is a thing.

I view the high-quality originals as “source” and resized+optimized images as “compiled” binaries. You generally want source in Git, not your compiled binaries.

[blopker]

As always, it really depends on what the source is. Often images are created with some software like Photoshop, would you commit the psd file to git? If you're a photographer, would you commit 20mb+ raw image files? Might make sense for a few images, but git is just not the right solution for binary data in general. Every modification has to duplicate the entire file. This makes working with the repo unpleasant very quickly.

In general, I recommend people back up binary files to cloud storage, like S3, and only commit optimized, deployment ready assets to git. There's also GitLFS, but it's clucky to use.

[ramijames]

I like this take. I tend to agree.