VVenC 1.8 Released For Speeding Up Open-Source H.266/VVC Encoding

[Quackdoc]

EDIT: what's infuriating about webp is almost every site uses it wrong with obvious quality loss compared to jpg then claiming it saves bandwidth... how about you just reduce the jpg settings, a similar problem may be happening with vp9 vs h264 videos

is there a right way of using webp? it's bad for animations due to mediocre compression. lossy webp is garbage in terms of compression, often barely just edging out mozjpeg, while loosing a significant amount of details, and while it's lossless compression is pretty decent, it's still at a large feature deficit compared to optimized pngs and while still a size savings for lossless (assuming you are dealing with only 8bit source since higher bitdepth will infact be lossy) im not sure it's worth it

[kn00tcn]

is there a right way of using webp?

most sites that use webp do not intend to be lossless and did not use 4:4:4 jpg anyway, so the context is 4:2:0 lossy disposable 'small size' images (like a flood of news photos or a giant store library)

i suppose i should experiment with webp settings to see if higher quality levels are visually comparable to similar jpg levels while reducing filesize, because it really seemed like most resorted to 'look how small this q50 webp is compared to q85 jpg', or they used some random default q setting rather than deciding for themselves

though it's true that at very low quality/bitrate constrained settings, these modern codecs look much cleaner than older codecs (have you seen av1 at around 500kbit, it's not a disaster and you can see some of the space saving tricks like different moving objects running at different framerates)

[Quackdoc]

most sites that use webp do not intend to be lossless and did not use 4:4:4 jpg anyway, so the context is 4:2:0 lossy disposable 'small size' images (like a flood of news photos or a giant store library)

i suppose i should experiment with webp settings to see if higher quality levels are visually comparable to similar jpg levels while reducing filesize, because it really seemed like most resorted to 'look how small this q50 webp is compared to q85 jpg', or they used some random default q setting rather than deciding for themselves

though it's true that at very low quality/bitrate constrained settings, these modern codecs look much cleaner than older codecs (have you seen av1 at around 500kbit, it's not a disaster and you can see some of the space saving tricks like different moving objects running at different framerates)

I still believe that webp has little place, I would rather use jpegs (mozjpeg encoder is much better then libjpeg-turbo) for lossy (or JXLs now if im not distributing on the web) or png's for lossless (or again, jxl for non web distribution)