Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

What’s the best lossless image format?

siipo.la

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 166 posts

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#121

Post by BeFlatXIII »

al_borland wrote: post #96
Beltalowda wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without a doubt 5 years now JPEG XL will become like Opus and set the standard for next generation image formats. I wrote a little X11 screenshot tool last year; one of the reasons I wrote it is because I wanted to save images as WebP rather than PNG that most tools use, since it's quite a bit smaller. Not that I'm running out of disk space, but it just seemed nice; one of those "no, it's not really needed but it's…

Apple didn't support WebP for the longest time. A bunch of fairly major sites started using them. While they worked in the browser, when downloading the image macOS couldn't open it. The same went for the video format. I just tried downloading a couple and they seem to work now, but I've grown to hate WebP. Even if they open today, I likely won't keep anything saved as WebP, because I won't trust it will work down th…

Apple could force the industry forward if they added Opus, FLAC, and JPEG XL support everywhere. Ok, they’re often the ones holding everyone else back in these areas.

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#122

Post by BeFlatXIII »

thayne wrote: post #104
LeoPanthera wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very misleading. Some of those 9 "apps" include imagemagick, ffmpeg, exiftool, libvips, and Qt KImageFormats. These libraries power a vast amount of software. Support is also in beta for Firefox and Chrome.

So if you are on linux, practically every app that deals with images will work. On windows and mac, it's probably less likely.

I wonder why companies with multi-billion dollar budgets for each OS release are such laggards at building in support for formats that presumably would not change much between each release.

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#123

Post by fho »

zarzavat wrote: post #111
thayne wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> DVORAK is better than QWERTY Not if you're a programmer, punctuation, which is much more frequent in programming languages than english, is a lot harder to type. I've heard colemak is better for developers, but as a vim user, relearning touch typing AND my vim muscle memory doesn't appeal to me, so i haven't given it a serious try.

In vim wouldn’t you just remap everything so that the physical keys stay the same in normal mode, and only use an alternative layout in insert mode?

I was at that point several times (using Neo2).

The problem is that there is too much to remap, basically you need every letter on the keyboard. And if you keep positions, mnemonics do not make sense anymore. "Change Inner Word" would become "JC," (on Dvorak).

If you keep the letters (instead of the positions) all commands in muscle memory do not work anymore. I tried to relearn those ... but in the end it is too much effort for too little gain.

These days, whenever I get fancy I just switch the keyboard layout to Neo2 when writing longer texts and switch back when going back to command mode. (I guess there is a way to automate that switch, that would be interesting now that I think of it).

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#124

Post by afiori »

Beltalowda wrote: post #56
lajamerr wrote: post #22

JPEG XL is the standard to beat them all. Like how Opus became the definitive codec for lossy compression for the web. JPEG XL covers nearly every use case for images, even replacing GIFs with it's animation support. Existing JPEGs can also be re-encoded losslessly into JPEG XL format/data structure and get significant file size savings. This backwards compatiability is very important in transitioning to web to JPEG…

> Without a doubt 5 years now JPEG XL will become like Opus and set the standard for next generation image formats. I wrote a little X11 screenshot tool last year; one of the reasons I wrote it is because I wanted to save images as WebP rather than PNG that most tools use, since it's quite a bit smaller. Not that I'm running out of disk space, but it just seemed nice; one of those "no, it's not really needed but it's…

Telegram supports WebP in a very irritating way; you can simply copy paste and it works perfectly, but it assume it is a sticker and so it is shown sticker sized and without the ability to zoom.

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#125

Post by josefx »

Wowfunhappy wrote: post #88
Beltalowda wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Without a doubt 5 years now JPEG XL will become like Opus and set the standard for next generation image formats. I wrote a little X11 screenshot tool last year; one of the reasons I wrote it is because I wanted to save images as WebP rather than PNG that most tools use, since it's quite a bit smaller. Not that I'm running out of disk space, but it just seemed nice; one of those "no, it's not really needed but it's…

You could make a similar case for audio. GP described Opus as "the definitive codec for lossy compression", which made me do a bit of a double take. Opus is absolutely the technically superior audio format, but when you want to give users a file you'll be sure they can play, you give them an MP3. I expect JPEG and PNG to become for images what MP3 is today. And I expect H.264 to become that for video. These formats a…

> But backwards compatibility always wins, because it fits what the world was already designed around.

Early Itanium included a x86 unit. Intel tried everything it could to push it.

> and I'm sure Esperanto is lightyears ahead of the monstrosity that is English

A lot of the complexity in English comes from active use and adapting to new concepts and integrating foreign words. Hopefully Esperanto will never be in a position to suffer the same issue and join the ranks of Itanium instead.

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#126

Post by imagetic »

ollifi wrote: post #99
accrual wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another example is in radiology. Many thousands of medical images are created and stored in lossless JPEG2000 every day with entire ecosystems of software to store and move them.

Also in digital cinemas films are JPEG2000 sequences.

Huh?

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#127

Post by Iv »

detuur wrote: post #66
Iv wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh adoption does not have to be that good. It is for researchers right now, to exchange results. So the only requirement is that it is possible to use it with a somewhat mature lib in python.

I absolutely recommend JXL. It is developed by the JPEG Group as a successor to JPEG2000 and performs better in nearly every metric (big exception currently being encoder speed). JPEG2000 isn't really widely supported, but does have many more libraries available. So unless you expect library availability and/or encoder speed to hurt adoption, go for JXL.

Thanks I'll give it a try!

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#128

Post by Wowfunhappy »

chrisseaton wrote: post #118
Wowfunhappy wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You could make a similar case for audio. GP described Opus as "the definitive codec for lossy compression", which made me do a bit of a double take. Opus is absolutely the technically superior audio format, but when you want to give users a file you'll be sure they can play, you give them an MP3. I expect JPEG and PNG to become for images what MP3 is today. And I expect H.264 to become that for video. These formats a…

> Itanium was better than AMD64 I thought the consensus was that Itanium turned out to be a significant mistake and represented a misestimate of how we could utilise it in software?

Yeah, axiolite‘s reply caused me to read up more on the history of Itanium, and I think that was a poor example on my part.

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#129

Post by chrismorgan »

zuzun wrote: post #114
chrismorgan wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s unlikely that WebP was what helped there, but rather more lossy encoding (presuming it was JPEGs you were replacing). Yes, WebP is smaller for a given perception quality level, but it’s typically not that much smaller; you could have achieved results almost as good by reencoding to the same perception quality as you used on the WebPs but still as JPEGs.

JPEG doesn't support transparency.

Yeah, images where lossy compression is fine but an alpha channel is needed are the one situation where switching to WebP (or AVIF, and soon JPEG XL) makes sense.

Re: What’s the best lossless image format?

#130

Post by CaptainNegative »

BeFlatXIII wrote: post #122
thayne wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if you are on linux, practically every app that deals with images will work. On windows and mac, it's probably less likely.

I wonder why companies with multi-billion dollar budgets for each OS release are such laggards at building in support for formats that presumably would not change much between each release.

For one thing, delaying support for basic features lets one ship them as hot features for future launches and updates.

Case in point, Apple making a fuss last Monday over finally allowing users to change file extensions in CandyCrushOS^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H iPadOS 16, a move some 51 years after mv was introduced to Unix on which that operating system is ostensibly based.

Post reply on HN