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

[wswartzendruber]

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...

JPEG XL's royalty status is murky at best. The reference implementation is available under an Apache-2.0 license, but going by the license text, only that implementation is covered as royalty-free.

[zxy_thf]

JPEG XL's royalty status is murky at best. The reference implementation is available under an Apache-2.0 license, but going by the license text, only that implementation is covered as royalty-free.

From the license text you can do more than that

each Contributor hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare Derivative Works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute the Work and such Derivative Works in Source or Object form.

In other words, (if I read it correctly), when some feel the performance of the reference software is below exception, patching the reference and then redistribute it is allowed.

I think this covers the most important case, and creating another library from scratch, say, libturbojpeg-xl, in my opinion, is wasting developers' time.

[wswartzendruber]

I think this covers the most important case, and creating another library from scratch, say, libturbojpeg-xl, in my opinion, is wasting developers' time.

And what about hardware implementations? Or GPGU? Or FPGA of other types? Or someone wanted to make a Rust implementation?

[microcode]

Why not just write a faster AVIF encoder if the concern is encoding time? AVIF is not just inherently slow to compress: the costs come from trying to make full use of the tools in AV1.

[Viki Ai]

From the license text you can do more than that

In other words, (if I read it correctly), when some feel the performance of the reference software is below exception, patching the reference and then redistribute it is allowed.

I think this covers the most important case, and creating another library from scratch, say, libturbojpeg-xl, in my opinion, is wasting developers' time.

That is the software license. What about licensing for the IP used in the software, if you - say - want to distribute the actual compressed photos?

[Mario Junior]

OMG, I hate webp so much!

[rmfx]

First they should change this ridiculous name.

[intelfx]

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...

Many times this.

AVIF sounds hip but is objectively worse and less featureful than FLIF/FUIF and its successor JPEG XL. It is royalty-free as well.

Unfortunately nobody seems to understand this and chase the shiny AV1-derived thing instead.

[cl333r]

AVIF sounds hip but is objectively worse and less featureful than FLIF and its successor JPEG XL.

Netflix doesn't seem fond of JPEG XL [1], in their huge blog they only mention it as a one short paragraph. Do you think both Netflix and Google engineers are stupid?
I suspect they're not, thus there must be something we don't know about or misappreciate.


[1] https://netflixtechblog.com/avif-for...ng-b1d75675fe4

[hellomoto]

OMG, I hate webp so much!

Can you explain why?