Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Google Is Already Experimenting With WebP2 As Successor To WebP Image Format

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

  • Google Is Already Experimenting With WebP2 As Successor To WebP Image Format

    Phoronix: Google Is Already Experimenting With WebP2 As Successor To WebP Image Format

    Google engineers are already working on WebP2 as the next-generation version of their still image file format...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...rimental-WebP2

  • #2
    When you thought one standard will rule them all (AVIF) a new one comes along...

    Comment


    • #3
      why even do this? WebP is already good, for the best u want AVIF

      Comment


      • #4
        I suggest supporting JPEG XL instead, which incorporates techniques from FLIF. The world does not need another half-baked format. Unfortunately, if it is incorporated into Chrome...

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by davidbepo View Post
          why even do this? WebP is already good, for the best u want AVIF
          Yeah, and why bother creating a new WebP2 when AVIF is already finished and known to be better than WebP2?

          Comment


          • #6
            Well, considering a bunch of Google Suite products don't even support importing WebP yet...

            Comment


            • #7
              So is it still based on VP9 or it now uses AV1? Or it has its own VP9 implementation? I'm confused.

              Comment


              • #8
                I'm almost at the point of saying that maybe JPEG isn't good enough for a 4k image... but, yeah, it's really hard to justify yet another image format.

                I'll wait to see which one is still around in 10 years' time.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think I have only seen the original webp in the wild once...

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    And everyone forgot about FLI-

                    Originally posted by Old Grouch View Post
                    I suggest supporting JPEG XL instead, which incorporates techniques from FLIF
                    Ughhhhh

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X