Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Mozilla Introduces New JPEG Encoding Library

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mozilla Introduces New JPEG Encoding Library

    Phoronix: Mozilla Introduces New JPEG Encoding Library

    Mozilla has introduced a new open-source JPEG encoding library that it claims can measurably reduce the file-size of encoded images...

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=MTYyMzI

  • #2
    What about CPU usage?
    (being low it can really be very good with battery devices)

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by rudregues View Post
      What about CPU usage?
      (being low it can really be very good with battery devices)
      It's irrelevant. JPEG encoding and decoding functions are already hardware accelerated on mobile devices via ASICs and SIMD instruction sets so this wouldn't change anything for the worse or better once it's properly optimized.

      Comment


      • #4
        Webp

        All this begs the question... why dont they support webp?

        Upto 50% small filesize and with transparency. If firefox also had support, most of the major browser vendors would be covered.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by You- View Post
          All this begs the question... why dont they support webp?

          Upto 50% small filesize and with transparency. If firefox also had support, most of the major browser vendors would be covered.
          Lack of application support, probably.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by rudregues View Post
            What about CPU usage?
            (being low it can really be very good with battery devices)
            Encoding is something done relatively infrequently, and usually on the content *production* side of things, where more time for decreased size is very much worth it, due to hundreds of thousands or millions of downloads.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by You- View Post
              All this begs the question... why dont they support webp?

              Upto 50% small filesize and with transparency. If firefox also had support, most of the major browser vendors would be covered.
              Probably because nobody but google believes in any tangible advantage over jpeg, actually rather the opposite (tends to smooth details). And it rather sucks as Picture format without interlaced and lossless rotations.
              That "50% reduction without visible degradation" google claimed can just as easily archieved by dialing down the quality option of jpeg - it just showed that many pictures on the web are compressed with high settings (which at some point dont give noteable improvements) or bad encoders.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by rudregues View Post
                What about CPU usage?
                (being low it can really be very good with battery devices)
                Note, it says "encoding" library, not "decoding". It's a trick for optimising the creation of JPEG files, not for displaying them. As such, economy of CPU and battery usage isn't really a top concern...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Calinou View Post
                  Lack of application support, probably.
                  At least WebP is seeing more support than Microsoft's JPEG-XR. I added support for it to my own graphics application using their Open Source libjxr. The library isn't the easiest thing to use, but finding example images on the Internet was quite difficult! It looks like a total failure.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by phoronix View Post
                    the Mozilla work is based upon libjpeg-turbo
                    So this is a fork, right? If so: What's the reason for it? Why not contribute to libjpeg-turbo instead?

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X