Encoding and decoding speeds are acceptable, but should be improved
FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
31–40 of 153 posts
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#32Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#33Earlier quoted context omitted.
5 months ago. This is my first time seeing this item.
My point is not that it shouldn't be there again, it's that some potentially interesting stuffs have already been discussed, so the previous thread is probably worth a look too.
You should put that into your first post :) Most of the time I see post like this meaning it was a double post.
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#34Honest question. Seriously not trying to dismiss the work. Why not TIFF? 30 years old, already built into nearly every graphics application, supports everything this proposes and more. Plus it is already supported in Safari. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_Image_File_Format
[deleted]
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#35Encoding and decoding speeds are acceptable, but should be improved
You must be from the Ministry of Encoding.
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#36If browsers supported APIs to allow "native" image/video/audio codecs to be written in JS, we could support new formats like this without needing any co-operation from the (very conservative) browser vendors. I wrote a proposal for this here: https://discourse.wicg.io/t/custom-image-audio-video-codec-a...
Seems like a good way to get a bazillion new formats that we won't be able to read anymore in 5 years.
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#37Honest question. Seriously not trying to dismiss the work. Why not TIFF? 30 years old, already built into nearly every graphics application, supports everything this proposes and more. Plus it is already supported in Safari. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_Image_File_Format
TIFF compression is rubbish. If you just want a lossless image, PNG is everywhere now. The main (possibly only?) reason to use FLIF over PNG is the better compression.
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#38Honest question. Seriously not trying to dismiss the work. Why not TIFF? 30 years old, already built into nearly every graphics application, supports everything this proposes and more. Plus it is already supported in Safari. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tagged_Image_File_Format
Because isn't open source, and is a proprietary format from Adobe ?
While not Open Source TIFF has age advantages in that close to anything related to it is unencumbered by patents, or will soon cease to be if any do remain. Also TIFF is an open container like MKV and can be used for far more than just simple pictures.
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#39Incredible work. My only comment is that the progressive loading example reveals that their algorithm seems to have desirable properties for lossy compression as well. Why not make FLIF support lossy and lossless? It's hard enough to get a new image format standardized as it is; offering a lossy mode would effectively give us a two-for-one deal. If PNG had a lossy mode that was even slightly better than JPEG (or exac…
Quoting a fragment from the final section:
"[...] any prefix (e.g. partial download) of a compressed file can be used as a reasonable lossy encoding of the entire image."
though they also have it listed explicitly in the TODO section:
"- Lossy compression"
Re: FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
No it's not. Etag is completely different. It's a tag that the webserver sends together with the response and which the browser sends to the server which can then return a 304 status code to indicate that the resource has not changed and the browser can use the cached copy. What the parent spoke about is adding some attribute to an anchor tag which specifies the hash of the resource so the browser can do safe cross d…
Just what we need... More ways to shoot our own feet off while trying to improve performance.
First I don't immediately see how to shoot your feet off with this but maybe you can elaborate a bit on why you think so.
And secondly, am I getting this right that you are in favor of dumbing everything down while also sacrificing performance on the way because someone could break something?