311–319 of 319 posts
Av1 images are way better, and you can already do them in Firefox with a video with 1 frame in it. It's a shame it hasn't been adopted as a singular format yet
it has been. look up avif, you can already sorta try it out on firefox nighty.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Shouldn't those patents be expiring soon? Edit: Did some more research and the patent risk appears to have passed as of 2016. Still nobody seems to have interest in JPEG2000.
webp was around since 2010 and has google's backing. Microsoft tried their own thing (Jpeg XR; 2009) and the actual JPEG committee announced their work Jpeg XL (with google backing) a while ago, while Apple switched to HEIC/HEIF as of 2017 (HEIC is like webp just based on HEVC aka H.265 instead of vp8 i-frames; and it's a patent mess of course). There is simply no reason why people in 2016 or now would be interested…
Are people just more cavalier about the patent risk these days? The problem with JPEG2000 wasn't the patents we knew about, it was the possibility of submarine patents. People were still wary after the GIF debacle. Nobody wanted to be charged $0.05/image after the fact when they've delivered literally billions of images. Plus the courts were seen as very favorable towards patent holders, even when they were acting in bad faith.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This isn't a good assumption to make, many people own cheap phones that lack hardware codecs that can decode videos with modern encodings.
I can't imagine any cheap SoC for smartphones without H.264 HW decoder because playing video is essential and it can record video. Possibly exists for low-feature phones without camera but it's not for web browsing.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>JPEG can't do transparency JPEG "can't" do depth maps either, and yet it manages to do them just fine. "Portrait mode" on Android is simply JPEG + greyscale JPEG embedded in metadata. If anyone really wanted transparency, it is very easy to add it to JPEG. That said, in practice, transparency is not needed in non-vector / non-generated graphics formats. The nature doesn't really have an alpha channel, photographs ce…
The problem is always standards. I want transparency to work correctly everywhere, not just in one application and broken everywhere else. Even if transparency was add to JPEG right now, it would take sometime to become available everywhere, and you would have tons of legacy devices showing broken transparency. The advantage of a new format that supports transparency from is interception is that every device that is…
JPEG is optimized for photos, which don't have transparent parts.
SVG and PNG are optimized for graphics.
So, if you need transparency, WEBP is probably not the format you'd choose anyway.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just have to re-affirm I do appreciate the lower quality render path of hevc (blurry) more than the default for jpeg and others (blocky mess). I really don't visually notice the lower quality reductions at much lower quality levels/file sizes than comparable blocky formats. That's not to say it isn't lower quality, when looking in detail you see it... but for a lot of use cases (and in video) much better experience…
To be fair, decent JPEG deblocking should have been a solved problem already and included in decoders, see for example: https://github.com/victorvde/jpeg2png
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The problem is always standards. I want transparency to work correctly everywhere, not just in one application and broken everywhere else. Even if transparency was add to JPEG right now, it would take sometime to become available everywhere, and you would have tons of legacy devices showing broken transparency. The advantage of a new format that supports transparency from is interception is that every device that is…
The larger picture is that you can use PNG or SVG anywhere you need transparency, which are also better suited for the content that has transparency. JPEG is optimized for photos, which don't have transparent parts. SVG and PNG are optimized for graphics. So, if you need transparency, WEBP is probably not the format you'd choose anyway.
It is pretty common to have anime characters where you remove the background to use as reactions, and while you can use PNG in those cases it makes the images huge. WebP makes it ideal for those cases, this is even the case that I saw this being used in some image boards (specially also including animation, another thing that is popular).
Just because you can't think in a use case there isn't mean that there isn't a use case.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Safari users seem to update very quickly (based on stats about iOS and MacOS update timelines). I've already got some desktop-oriented websites that are WebP only, and once Safari supports WebP on iOS, I'll finish transitioning them all. The space savings is quite nice for my bandwidth bills (my websites don't have video, so I estimate saving about 20% in bandwidth costs, or approximately $120/month across all of the…
I wouldn’t be able to view any of your sites as I’ve disabled webp in my browser. It always looks blurry to me and if I save an image I can only view it again in a browser.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using Java code for things that are this performance critical doesn't feel like a good idea. It will work of course, but it will probably GC a lot, and while modern JVMs do JIT, the code they generate can't be as optimal as something that has manual SIMD optimizations.
Using C code is how you get the next cloudbleed. I'm happy to pay a performance cost for the sake of memory safety.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Using C code is how you get the next cloudbleed. I'm happy to pay a performance cost for the sake of memory safety.
Fix this easily by abstracting the manipulation of user uploaded files to chroot/serverless.