Live data from Hacker News

WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

eng.aurelienpierre.com

41–50 of 411 posts

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#41
post #4

I opened the first two pictures in separate tabs and switched quickly between them. There is zero difference. Tried it on two different monitors, Chrome and Firefox. Same with the pictures of the guy at the end. EDIT: The last comparison is webp twice, he linked it wrong. Here is the jpg one, still no difference: https://eng.aurelienpierre.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/8/20...

The gradients in the webp look clearly terrible to me. I'm using a normal 1440p monitor, nothing fancy

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#42
post #24

This seems to be in the same spirit as audiophiles claiming they can hear the difference between various speaker cables, or the "hints of dark chocolate" in wine tasting. Personally I see zero differences in the images on that page and unless the author has some really super-human vision abilities (possible! but unlikely) my guess is he doesn't either. WebP looks perfectly fine to me.

It's very easy to see the banding if you have a half-decent monitor. You don't even need to view the images fullscreen - and I say that as someone short-sighted with deuteranomaly.

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#43
post #21

Unless the OP is using a 8K monitor with professional color grading, I don't understand how he can say that some of these pictures are "looking like shit". They all look exactly the same to me on my regular 27" 1080p, on my 27" 2K or on my iPhone.

Easily visible on my air M1, 1080p gaming monitor and pixel 3

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#44
post #21

Unless the OP is using a 8K monitor with professional color grading, I don't understand how he can say that some of these pictures are "looking like shit". They all look exactly the same to me on my regular 27" 1080p, on my 27" 2K or on my iPhone.

Probably if you’re working a lot with photography compression artifacts start to become a real eyesore. Especially the first lower quality webp image does look like shit to me but I also realize a lot of other people would not consciously notice.

The banding is just not supposed to be there.

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#45
post #29
post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be partially placebo affect. Its not like he is doing a blinded test.

It's not, it's just that people who spend thousands of dollars and hours into photography are more susceptible to care. Same with music, most people are fine with $15 earphones while musicians or music enthusiasts will find them disgusting.

Music is probably a bad example of your point, as that field is famous for audiophiles insisting they can hear a difference for various things only for them not being able to tell the difference in a double blind test.

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#47

It's such a shame Google decided to block adoption of JPEG XL: it's a strict improvement over classic JPEG (you can losslessly reencode JPEG to JXL and reduce the size, due to a better entropy coder in JXL!) and JXL has various other upgrades compared to 'classic' JPEG. In the meantime, let's hope AVIF or whatever manages to pick up the slack, and/or other browsers decide en masse to support JPEG XL anyway; that woul…

Google haven’t explicitly decided to block adoption of JPEG XL. They removed an incomplete implementation from Chromium which had never been shipped, because it was a maintenance burden and they weren’t ready to commit to supporting it. That’s quite a different thing. It may indicate a broader strategic direction, but it doesn’t necessarily.

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#48

I know this is not constructive and I'm sorry, but I just can't read the text with those st and ct ligatures. It makes me feel like the author is trolling with them and I shouldn't take the text seriously. I know that's an exaggeration but that's what the design makes me feel.

> I'm sorry, but I just can't read the text with those st and ct ligatures.

The whole font is bad. It looks pixilated and blurry, which can only be explained by that being the intended look. It's bizarre.

Re: WebP is so great except it's not (2021)

#50
post #15

I know this is not constructive and I'm sorry, but I just can't read the text with those st and ct ligatures. It makes me feel like the author is trolling with them and I shouldn't take the text seriously. I know that's an exaggeration but that's what the design makes me feel.

At first I thought I had an unusual amount of very small hair on my display.

Very small, curly hairs... hmm. (I might have thought the same thing while reading this on the toilet... so you can imagine the extra layer of credibility that afforded.)
Post reply on HN