Rise of JPEG XL: Apple's Support and Image Compression Insights
cloudinary.com
Significance of Apple's support for JPEG XL and what this means for the widespread adoption of this next-generation image compression format.
  • reddig33@lemmy.worldEnglish
    01·
    2 years ago

    What is the point of this format? How is it any better than png or webp? Do we really need yet another format? I mean 44k really isn’t that great of a savings in the example used.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        2 years ago

        I think you forgot a pretty crucial point, that it is also royalty free. Royalty would be a huge problem.

        I have yet to see a general royalty free image format as feature complete and up to date as IFF was for the Amiga back in 1985. From your list, Jpeg XL would finally even surpass that. As a very feature complete format improving on at least 3 formats (GIF PNG JPG)while wrapping them into 1. The only thing missing, is to become universally supported.

        I wonder how the Chrome team managed to test it so poorly they claimed it wasn’t worth it? Just the versatility alone should make it a no-brainer.

      • rdri@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 years ago

        It’s very slow on high compression profiles though, and consumes a lot of resources.

    • DarienGS@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 years ago

      JPEG XL provides comparable image quality to ordinary JPEG compression at around 80% of the file size. It also supports lossless encoding at smaller sizes than PNG, and can handle layers, transparency and CMYK, so in principle it could conveniently replace almost every existing raster image format.

    • pastcoma@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 years ago

      So I agree with your sentiment for the most part. Mainly, it’s frustrating to see all of these new image standards come out which somehow compete with each other due to lack of browser support.

      That said 44k isn’t peanuts. That’s a huge reduction, especially on lower end connection speeds.

    • Paradox@lemdro.idOPEnglish
      1·
      2 years ago

      The article discusses how it’s better than webp. Specifically, it’s much better at both compression ratios and performance, at all quality levels. WebP has problems where the compression falls off due to being locked to yuv420