Live data from Hacker News

Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

r2.community.samsung.com

31–40 of 51 posts

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#31
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> On November 22, 2016, HEVC Advance announced a major initiative, revising their policy to allow software implementations of HEVC to be distributed directly to consumer mobile devices and personal computers royalty free, without requiring a patent license. Regardless of that, macOS, Windows, iOS and Android all have OS-level support, via a combination of hardware and software decoders. Ubuntu (and Debian) provide li…

Mate, Apple has been using HEIC for over 6 years, but they didn't add it to Safari until less than a year ago. And Apple doesn't even want you to use HEIC on the web! They added it to Safari so that app devs can use it in WebViews.

... So why does it need to "go away" then?

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#32
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They want their awful webp format to win for some reason.

Honest question: what’s so awful about WEBP? Though it’s worse than the gen arriving now, it’s better than or the same as the one before it for the use cases it supports, and free and open. I get the impression people associate it with brokenness and low quality, but the brokenness is just a lack of support, and the quality a creator choice. Maybe its original sin was not trying to be suitable for original data, lead…

Lossy WebP has some crappy limitations. For example, it's limited to 4:2:0 chroma subsampling, which makes it unsuitable for high quality images. Hell, even if you restrict yourself to 420 JPEG, JPEG still comes out as having a higher quality ceiling than WebP. And yes, it does beat MozJPEG and libjpeg-turbo in file size sometimes, but newer JPEG encoders like jpegli crush WebP in size completely across the entire quality spectrum.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#33
post #9

I worked alongside the Google and Cloudinary teams who authored the JPEG XL spec and I'm glad their work's finally paying off. It's really weird Google deprecated the format despite contributing engineers to help build JPEG XL. I guess it's office politics

They want their awful webp format to win for some reason.

I think you mean AVIF.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#34
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mate, Apple has been using HEIC for over 6 years, but they didn't add it to Safari until less than a year ago. And Apple doesn't even want you to use HEIC on the web! They added it to Safari so that app devs can use it in WebViews.

... So why does it need to "go away" then?

You'll have to ask the person who wanted that.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#35
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, JPEG XL is designed as an all-encompassing file format that also subsumes RAW and DNG. On the other hand, DNG 1.7.0.0 added JPEG XL as one of compression options back in 2022 (!), which might be what Samsung is actually using.

Where can I read more about JPEG XL subsumming of raw? As far as I understand, you cannot specify differen colorspace for different subsets of pixels?

That is done by a custom ICC profile. JPEG XL's own colorspace support is more like a shorthand for frequent presets.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#36
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They want their awful webp format to win for some reason.

Honest question: what’s so awful about WEBP? Though it’s worse than the gen arriving now, it’s better than or the same as the one before it for the use cases it supports, and free and open. I get the impression people associate it with brokenness and low quality, but the brokenness is just a lack of support, and the quality a creator choice. Maybe its original sin was not trying to be suitable for original data, lead…

It is not really awful. It is just way over hyped, over promised and under delivered. WebP was better than standard JPEG. But JPEG also improved via many other encoders such as MozJPEG. And it wasn't obvious what the advantage were, or it was so little it really shouldn't be included as a standard feature. Mozilla made their case back then with many testing and data point.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#37
post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Honest question: what’s so awful about WEBP? Though it’s worse than the gen arriving now, it’s better than or the same as the one before it for the use cases it supports, and free and open. I get the impression people associate it with brokenness and low quality, but the brokenness is just a lack of support, and the quality a creator choice. Maybe its original sin was not trying to be suitable for original data, lead…

It is not really awful . It is just way over hyped, over promised and under delivered. WebP was better than standard JPEG. But JPEG also improved via many other encoders such as MozJPEG. And it wasn't obvious what the advantage were, or it was so little it really shouldn't be included as a standard feature. Mozilla made their case back then with many testing and data point.

Transparency was a massive advantage to the point it became default compressed format for e.g. Android apps.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#38

I don't understand how google can just be consistently on the back foot of the "tech world hivemind" for going on 7 (?) years now and have zero shakeup of not just culture but at least PR.

Noone gave a crap about this format on this site until Google decided to not add it to Chrome. Noone used it, no posts were upvoted. It just became a thing when it was yet another reason to rant at Google.

Note how noone is asking Mozilla why Firefox won't support it or actually building websites using it.

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#39

Just reminding everyone that it is now 2024, and it is still impossible to send a HDR still image to a group of people not all in the same ecosystem. Apple for example “supports” the JPEG XL format, but decodes it to sRGB SDR irrespective of the source image gamut. As of today, Adobe Lightroom running on an Apple iDevice can edit a RAW camera image in HDR, can export the result in three formats… none of which can be…

I've edited photos using Photoshop and Lightroom with HDR support and was able to immediately view them in preview on my m1 Mac mini. Of course it looked different than if I viewed it in multiple different browsers or even the Canary, Dev, beta, release branches of all of those browsers if they had support for the image format at all. But they definitely did view correctly because I made sure that the images weren't professional... If viewed normally on something that wouldn't go HDR correctly you would just see a whole bunch of blown out whiteness but if it views correctly then you actually see that there was something in that Fulbright section of the image.

I also verified this by transferring the images to my NAS and then grabbing those images on my Pixel 5 at the time and also my pixel fold that I use now and both of those you could tell immediately when the HDR transforms the image. There's like a split second as the image shows up on the screen where you could tell that it's like tone mapping it or engaging the HDR display mode or something.

And I know we aren't talking about video but way back when Doom eternal came out I recorded a full playthrough of that using a capture card that I have that allows me to capture in h265 with proper HDR metadata. It was a messy setup because my only HDR monitor is my TV and my computers in my living room so I had to string an HDMI cable from my TV to the capture box input and then another HDMI to my computer monitor along with the USBC cable to my computer. So I beat the entire game in the avermedia preview window and then edited each level in DaVinci resolve exported that with all the correct settings after reading the like 4,000 page manual just to make sure I was doing it just right. The entire time I was editing I wasn't exactly sure it was going to come out right because my computer monitor is a 6-bit panel with dithering to make it 8-bit and it's not even an HDR monitor at all. But in the end, My m1 Mac mini was able to watch it on YouTube in HDR in 4K. My TCL 4K HDR TV was able to watch it using the built-in YouTube app. Basically anything I had that I could attach to a screen that would enable HDR mode would let that video play correctly, including the Pixel 5. And I did move things around in my living room just so I could make sure my windows 10/11 and I say that because I was insider preview around the transition time so it was kind of a hybrid of both in a way, that was also able to watch the video natively and on YouTube correctly.

I think things are more compatible than just looking at compatibility listings. If you have a modern computer with parts that are 7 years old but run a modern operating system and you have, and this is the kicker, a screen with a 10-bit or 12-bit panel that also has an actual rating of 1000 nits then you have something that can legitimately view the minimum standard for most HDR technical specifications.

If you're trying to look at HDR content and you say that it's not working correctly then you might not actually have a monitor that is at least the proper video industries or film industries minimum standard. It's okay if you have a cheap TV like I do that's an 8-bit panel that uses advanced dithering to make it 10 bit, mine for some whatever reason also could go up to 12 in windows. But you have to have that 10-bit minimum you have to have REC 2020/2084 and P3DCI 65 along with 1000 nits peak brightness.

Some gamer monitor saying that it's an HDR display and it has something like 600 nits isn't a standard it's a marketing term that that company made up so they could say it's HDR because all laypeople think HDR means is brighter. What's the point of having 1,024 levels of brightness per color if your brightness levels of your screen can't show that full dynamic range?

Re: Samsung Joins Apple and Adobe in Supporting JPEG XL

#40
post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where can I read more about JPEG XL subsumming of raw? As far as I understand, you cannot specify differen colorspace for different subsets of pixels?

That is done by a custom ICC profile. JPEG XL's own colorspace support is more like a shorthand for frequent presets.

how can custom ICC profile encode information about bayer filter layout, dark frame or dead/phase photosites?
Post reply on HN