Note that BPG is based on HEVC still frames, and may be more patent-emcubered than current alternatives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Portable_Graphics#Paten...
"Why BPG won't replace GIFs and not only"
Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
41–50 of 121 posts
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#42How does this compare to FLIF? The responsive features of FLIF seem fantastic. http://flif.info/
In the part where it says "Spot the difference" and everyone says "The BPG one looks worse". That's because BPG, even in "lossless" mode... is lossy. So you're taking a video with H.264 compression artifacts and recompressing it with HEVC artifacts. The quality can only go down.
FLIF on the other hand is lossless, so the image would be truly identical (pixel for pixel). However the filesize will likely be much larger, as MP4 is a very good at lossy compression. What BPG is doing is better performed by HTML5 video formats that already exist due to hardware acceleration support for H.264 and better memory management for video. Also there are patent issues with BPG due to it being based on HEVC.
FLIF is patent free, making it the more likely candidate for mass adoption. It's animation, like APNG is lossless and supports full 24-bit transparency (versus GIF's 8-bit). However the filesize for FLIF is considerably smaller than APNG, even when crushing it with algorithms like Zopfli. Still though, for full frame video, you'll have a better time with MP4, though FLIF will be better quality, it will only be marginal and not likely noticeable in most cases.
What is interesting is the responsive aspect of FLIF. If you encoded an HD video, but only display it on a page at a lower resolution, it will only download the minimum amount of data required to display the image up to that resolution. So it could technically require a lot less bandwidth from a server compared to MP4 if the user doesn't fullscreen the video. But this is more to do with implementation than with formats. YouTube does this same idea, though with a completely different style of execution, in which they only give the the quality for the resolution you are playing it at.
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#43How does this compare to FLIF? The responsive features of FLIF seem fantastic. http://flif.info/
FLIF only has a lossless mode. For lossless animation, it usually beats GIF, APNG, MNG, WebP and BPG. It is the only responsive animation format afaik.
For lossy movies, actual video codecs are best, since they're designed for that. BPG is essentially HEVC (a great but patent-encumbered video codec) so it should be good at lossy movies -- it will be worse on line-art animations with hard edges like e.g. cartoons, or animations with transparency.
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#44It says "Spot the differences? :) There’s none." Really? The BPG is WAY worse, IMHO. It's immediately apparent. I noticed it with my eyes before I parsed the text.
I don't even get to spot the difference. For some reason on my box chrome pegs the cpu at 25% for about 30 seconds then asks me to kill the page. Stripping out the alternate format, the other one plays instantly and with minimal cpu usage.
Read further down: "Current example is around 8-10s"
If you let it run for awhile it eventually decodes.
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#45Why can't we just use MP4? Add an inline JavaScript decoder for Mobile Safari, and then at least all the other browsers get instant hardware decoding.
Are there trust issues with allowing third-party MP4 embeds into user-submitted content such as forums/hosted blogs? Do we need a "no sound"/"max file size" attribute on the video tag?
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can H.264/H.265 do that in a lossless fashion?
No, hence, Gif/APNG are good for lossless animations. But for sites like imgur that host animations, I would like it if their gifv format (pretty much mp4/webm) played immediately on my mobile, without it having to be a gif file.
I think h264 does have a lossless mode, but it may end up bigger than a GIF.
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#47I just get an 'unresponsive script' error from line 95 of
https://eek.ro/assets/js/bpgdec8a.js
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#48[deleted]
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#49Half the comments are pointing out that BPG is implemented in JavaScript.
Like no shit? It's not natively supported in browsers, and OP makes a call for everyone to push browsers to natively support it.
I mean like, geez, I want a proper video-like playback format (e.g. 24+ frames per second) at a smaller file size, so that I can view videos on my mobile phone.
Gif lags on mobile internet, and MP4 requires that we explicitly hit the play button on mobile browsers.
So either we adopt a format like BPG, or adopt another format based on h.264/h.265/VP8/VP9/Theora but for the sole purpose of being a Gif-like animation.
Re: Why BPG will replace GIFs and more
#50[deleted]
You need to 8 seconds for the BPG to load, the web page is completelt unresponsive until it loads :(