Originally posted by birdie
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Could JPEG2000 Finally Take Off In 2020? It's A Possibility With High Throughput HTJ2K
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by brent View PostI'm not super convinced that AVIF is the future, either. There are competing specs that are very good, for instance FUIF, PIK and JPEG XL. These are properly optimized for still images and not just a container for AV1 I-frames. They are royalty-free, too.
- Likes 2
Comment
-
Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
HEIF has a better chance than JPEG2000 and AVIF or any of those others for one simple reason: I had to install support for it so my mother could open the photos from her damn iPhone.
JPEG XL has a real killer feature going for it, on the other hand: interoperability with JPEG. The JPEG XL encoding tools are a superset of JPEG, so you can re-encode a JPEG image with no quality loss to JPEG XL, while saving some 20% space. The other way around is possible, too: most JPEG XL files can be re-encoded as JPEG files very efficiently, without a full decode. It's good enough for doing it in realtime on the fly.
- Likes 10
Comment
-
Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
HEIF has a better chance than JPEG2000 and AVIF or any of those others for one simple reason: I had to install support for it so my mother could open the photos from her damn iPhone.
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by atomsymbolThere is no support for automatically extending web browser's list of image decoders (when an unknown image format is encountered) by pointing it to an URL containing packaged code implemented on top of a safe virtual machine.
At least I'm assuming that's what "emScripten-based JavaScript decoder", because emScripten is a WebAssembly compiler
Comment
-
Originally posted by brent View PostI'm not super convinced that AVIF is the future, either. There are competing specs that are very good, for instance FUIF, PIK and JPEG XL. These are properly optimized for still images and not just a container for AV1 I-frames. They are royalty-free, too.
As for JPEG 2000 it's a solid format even for today's standards. The biggest obstacles, why it wasn't adapted were not that much the efficiency (which is better than JPEG in almost all cases) and the features, but speed and patents. Patents aren't problem anymore and speed is solved largely with HTJ2K. If it will take of I don't think so, but it did find itself into some standards (PDF for example) and usages (as a format for digital cinema).
I wouldn't be too sad if JPEG 2000 takes off instead of other formats, but I think the best scenario would be JPEG XL, worst HEIF. AVIF would also be fine, but the thing that bugs me is that it supports lossless, but only for YUV, not RGB. Also AVIF and HEIF have a limited bit depth to 12-bits (more likely 10-bits) per channel and I don't know why a "future proof" image format would need to be limited just that (camera sensors capture 14-bits).
- Likes 5
Comment
-
Originally posted by ms178 View PostFirst, there is certainly a need for better picture compression. Just try to upload all your documtens for a job application with a reasonable quality and a hard limit on 2 or 4 MB (as mandated by a lot of public employers over here and that is not per file but for EVERYTHING combined - and don't laugh at me, ancient workflows and legacy IT are still a thing in my sector).
Comment
-
Originally posted by ix900 View Post
Working around that by creating new stuff is funny.
It is one area of technology which stagnated for a very long time, not because people were satisfied with what they had but due to the inability of hardware and software vendors to push a single standard forward.
- Likes 3
Comment
Comment