Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Guetzli: Google Rolls Out A New JPEG Encoder

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

  • Guetzli: Google Rolls Out A New JPEG Encoder

    Phoronix: Guetzli: Google Rolls Out A New JPEG Encoder

    Google has announced Guetzli, not a German cookie, but rather a new open-source algorithm for creating high-quality JPEGs that are 35% smaller than currently available methods...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...i-JPEG-Encoder

  • #2
    How does this relate/compare to mozjpeg?

    Comment


    • #3
      Hi Michael

      Just for Information and clarification: "Guetzli" is the Swiss German word for cookie.
      Not the German (or German German) word. (German German as the German language in Germany.)
      Switzerland does have 4 official national languages. In the Swiss German part, the official written language is German German (with some differences, like we don't use the ß for ss) . But we do talk in the Swiss German dialect / idiom. The Swiss German dialect is also used for local writing, some poetry, songs, there are Swiss German TV programs and even movies in Swiss German dialect.

      Back to "Guetzli":
      It might come from Switzerland, because that's where the largest Google division outside of the USA is situated. The Google Research Europe in Zürich. The location is presently expanding from 2'000 to 5'000 people. And it is the home of many important Google Projects like Youtube, Gmail, Google Maps and Google Assistant, just to name a few.

      Best regards from Switzerland,

      liebi Grüessli us dr Schwiiz

      Rouf (Swiss German for Rolf)


      PS: And thanks for your great work. You see: You are also being noticed in Switzerland.
      Last edited by rgloor; 03-16-2017, 03:02 PM.

      Comment


      • #4
        Interestingly there's a strong difference between Müsli and Müesli in Swiss German. (While in German German rather nobody would notice it.)

        Comment


        • #5
          <rant>
          why would a "human rater" prefer images produced by some specific jpeg encoder, if there is no difference in quality and file size?
          </rant>

          generaly speaking, (well.. up to) 35% smaller jpeg images with no quality loss is a good thing.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by stefansaraev View Post
            <rant>
            why would a "human rater" prefer images produced by some specific jpeg encoder, if there is no difference in quality and file size?
            </rant>
            because quality metric does not ideally reflect human perception

            Comment


            • #7
              I wonder why would google invest in this...
              I thought they were fans of webp... But as the name suggest I might only be suitable for web use.

              Anyway Is this new library for encoding only?

              Comment


              • #8
                I read somewhere that it requires huge amounts of memory for such encoding

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by cynic View Post
                  I read somewhere that it requires huge amounts of memory for such encoding
                  Isn't webp lossless?

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Massively slower compared to libjpeg-tran. Quick grepping through the code reveals no SSE/AVX code.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X