An implicit assumption is that "smaller file size is better" and if this discussion were about audio would probably be mp3 vs ogg vorbis... but flac is the BEST to em because I want all of the audio data in the best lossless compression scheme. As a photographer, I would like to have ALL of my image data in a losslessly compressed format as well. What is the FLAC equivalent in the photo/image space?
Is WebP really better than JPEG?
101–110 of 319 posts
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#102I wonder, why nobody mentioned Patrice Bellard's BPG[1]. It is based on HEVC and can be supported in any browser via a Javascript. From his website: BPG (Better Portable Graphics) is a new image format. Its purpose is to replace the JPEG image format when quality or file size is an issue. Its main advantages are: * High compression ratio. Files are much smaller than JPEG for similar quality. * Supported by most Web b…
Those are not the key features :( Key questions: (1) Is it encumbered by any patents? (2) Does a formal description of the algorithm exists, to allow for independent implementations? (3) Does a MIT/BSD or at least LGPL implementation exist? (4) Has it been submitted for standardization? Technical merits are of limited value if you can't deploy them.
Hard to imagine HEVC and unencumbered in the same sentence...
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#103Every time I run an image comparison, the webp version looks worse and yet Google insists it's the same quality. It's baffling. Even if the above were just an individual... bafflement? and not an actual issue, the size savings really don't seem worth the compatibility hassle, the extra manpower/workflow complexity to support 2 formats, the additional storage (and caching) caused by this duplication. And the above is…
And that is the reason why I dont like Open Media Alliance in General.
Not only does the best JPEG encoder perform as good if not better than the best WebP encoder. With a JPEG Repacker [1] JPEG file size could easily be 20% smaller. If you have to support a new format with relatively little benefits, why not just support using the repacked instead.
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#104An implicit assumption is that "smaller file size is better" and if this discussion were about audio would probably be mp3 vs ogg vorbis... but flac is the BEST to em because I want all of the audio data in the best lossless compression scheme. As a photographer, I would like to have ALL of my image data in a losslessly compressed format as well. What is the FLAC equivalent in the photo/image space?
TIFF, I believe?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIFF
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#105I really want a better alpha-mask standard to emerge. PNG24 is attractive, but huge. PNG8/GIF works well, but is pretty limited. I don't think WebP is it, but we'll see what comes out of the scrum. I'll work with whatever that is, but I won't waste my time chasing will o' the wisp "standards."
It's still relatively huge, and not widely supported without a polyfill, but FLIF [0] is a pretty neat format that tends to be smaller than the equivalent PNG, and can be converted to a lossy image "on the fly", and also supports alpha transparency. The polyfill is still kind of slow, at least compared to native PNG rendering on the browser, but it does work, and hopefully some day it can be integrated into the stand…
>hopefully some day it can be integrated into the standard.
see jpeg-xl
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#106Every time I run an image comparison, the webp version looks worse and yet Google insists it's the same quality. It's baffling. Even if the above were just an individual... bafflement? and not an actual issue, the size savings really don't seem worth the compatibility hassle, the extra manpower/workflow complexity to support 2 formats, the additional storage (and caching) caused by this duplication. And the above is…
And that is the reason why I dont like Open Media Alliance in General. Not only does the best JPEG encoder perform as good if not better than the best WebP encoder. With a JPEG Repacker [1] JPEG file size could easily be 20% smaller. If you have to support a new format with relatively little benefits, why not just support using the repacked instead. [1] https://github.com/google/brunsli
Absolutely. Simply unscrewing the Huffman stage from the bottom of JPEG and replacing it with a more effective, modern lossless stage kills webp's gains and does not incur in generation loss - the image is pixel accurate to the source jpeg.
You'll probably know this already, but Brunsli made it into the JPEG XL standard. I'm quite happy about it!
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#107ASK HN: Since this discussion has come up, I would like to ask HN if you are interested for an in-depth comparison on a production workload.
I run this https://www.gumlet.com which serves more than 50M images per day. We can put entire study on different image formats if HN finds it helpful. Please let us know.
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#108One of the biggest barriers against adoption of these newer formats is the lack of pure java implementations for use server side. The Java wrappers around a native binary are helpful, but for many projects not very useful and this hinders adoption. https://github.com/haraldk/TwelveMonkeys/issues?q=is%3Aissue...
Is JAVA still a thing?
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#109I make a lot of memes for Reddit with MS Paint. I tend to avoid WebP because of compatibility issues. Neither Reddit's native image host nor Imgur allows WebP files, and I save memes using images from multiple formats (e.g. a jpg, a png, and a WebP) in jpg or png to avoid that. When a WebP file is saved into jpg or png Paint gives an error message about how this will erase all transparency, but for my purposes that i…
I mean Photoshop doesn't even support it either so every encounter I have with this file format has been an exercise in frustration and honestly would have preferred it if it just went away and was replace with something companies are free to implement safely.
IIRC WebP is open-source and unencumbered by patents so there's no reason it couldn't be implemented. That said, it's not a good source format.
Re: Is WebP really better than JPEG?
#110chrome keeps changing downloaded images to webP which is annoyin af. can't even find a way to disable it
Use the developer tools, right click on the image's request and from there copy as curl... paste in an editor and remove all the headers, etc and you should get a more compatible version.