Originally posted by SciK
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Google Outlines Why They Are Removing JPEG-XL Support From Chrome
Collapse
X
-
-
Originally posted by Go_Vulkan View PostWell, webp is supported in every browser and not "hidden", it just works.
It is also supported in LibreOffice, Gimp 2.99, content management systems, wiki engines, and so on.
Any other format would have to be significantly better than webp, not just better than the old JPG. I have used webp for some years now, both the compressed and the lossless version, and I really don't miss anything. Nor do I miss just another format like jpeg xl.
And there is Android 8, TVs, ipads. I'm not mad at it but this will take a long while.Last edited by grok; 01 November 2022, 01:12 PM.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by wswartzendruber View PostWell I can confirm that Brave decodes AVIF much, much more quickly than JPEG XL. The test image used was test.png.
ffmpeg -i test.png -crf 0 -row-mt 1 -tile-columns 2 -tile-rows 2 test.avif
cjxl -q 100 test.png test.jxl
Unfortunately, JPEG XL has superior file sizing when maintaining lossless:
test.png: 8.5 MB
test.avif: 7.8 MB
test.jxl: 6.0 MB
I have verified that AVIF and JPEG XL were lossless here because converting them both to BMP produces files with identical hashes.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Artim View Post
Because the use of HDR in pictures is so common, especially on the web or what? The discussion here isn't really about what format professionals should use, but what makes sense for the web.
Originally posted by skeevy420 View PostPosts were all "Why bother with that? No one can afford the hardware and only three games support it." and now you can buy television sets with Adaptive Sync. HDR is the same way. Within the next 3-5 years nearly everything will be at least HDR10.
*But* it probably makes sense to look at pretty things on a HDR TV
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Artim View PostBecause the use of HDR in pictures is so common, especially on the web or what? The discussion here isn't really about what format professionals should use, but what makes sense for the web.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by skeevy420 View Post
That's why we're all very pissed off about JPEG-XL in Chrome. JPEG-XL makes the most sense for both professionals and the web. You can encapsulate multibracketed HDR shots with it, you can losslessly recompress all your existing RAW and JPEGs, you can store multiple zoom levels in it, it's progressive so it's better with lower bandwidth internet connections. Those last two are very important for the internet since they allow low-bandwidth connections to view acceptable images faster and allow providers/content hosters to recompress all of their JPEGs to free up a lot of space (more so than with WebP or AVIF).
Not only is it better with the current status quo, it's future forward with everything that it offers. Its lossless mode even has the potential to replace RAW.
You might be rolling your eyes about HDR now, but its no different than everyone rolling their eyes about Adaptive Sync (G/Freesync) 10 years ago. Posts were all "Why bother with that? No one can afford the hardware and only three games support it." and now you can buy television sets with Adaptive Sync. HDR is the same way. Within the next 3-5 years nearly everything will be at least HDR10.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Artim View Post
Because the use of HDR in pictures is so common, especially on the web or what? The discussion here isn't really about what format professionals should use, but what makes sense for the web.
Not only is it better with the current status quo, it's future forward with everything that it offers. Its lossless mode even has the potential to replace RAW.
You might be rolling your eyes about HDR now, but its no different than everyone rolling their eyes about Adaptive Sync (G/Freesync) 10 years ago. Posts were all "Why bother with that? No one can afford the hardware and only three games support it." and now you can buy television sets with Adaptive Sync. HDR is the same way. Within the next 3-5 years nearly everything will be at least HDR10.
- Likes 6
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Go_Vulkan View PostWell, webp is supported in every browser and not "hidden", it just works.
It is also supported in LibreOffice, Gimp 2.99, content management systems, wiki engines, and so on.
Any other format would have to be significantly better than webp, not just better than the old JPG. I have used webp for some years now, both the compressed and the lossless version, and I really don't miss anything. Nor do I miss just another format like jpeg xl.
- Likes 2
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by Go_Vulkan View PostWell, webp is supported in every browser and not "hidden", it just works.
It is also supported in LibreOffice, Gimp 2.99, content management systems, wiki engines, and so on.
Any other format would have to be significantly better than webp, not just better than the old JPG. I have used webp for some years now, both the compressed and the lossless version, and I really don't miss anything. Nor do I miss just another format like jpeg xl.
For me WebP is Good Enough. Alpha channel + good compression for pictures/photos = best of PNG and JPEG.
Sure, I do miss JPEG Progressive, but that's not enough of a killer feature for my use case.
- Likes 3
Leave a comment:
Leave a comment: