Live data from Hacker News

Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

opensource.googleblog.com

61–70 of 93 posts

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#61

> In this Gemini-reconstructed scene, ... I'm generally pretty pro-AI, but I find this icky. Of course, I wouldn't have noticed except the whiteboard drawing seemed not quite right, so I'll probably be fooled in the future.

Based on what I've heard, Google is monitoring per-org usage and strongly / incessantly encouraging teams to experiment with the technology, so a lot of tokens get spent on pointless stuff like that. The preceding diagram, which is needlessly busy and blurry, appears to be AI-generated too.

This was not a factor. It was either staging the photograph or AI. Photographing inside the office can be a complex process with seeking appropriate permissions, and I didn't have an alternative space to do the photography. AI felt like an easier solution.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#62

> In this Gemini-reconstructed scene, ... I'm generally pretty pro-AI, but I find this icky. Of course, I wouldn't have noticed except the whiteboard drawing seemed not quite right, so I'll probably be fooled in the future.

Came here to say the same thing. Why add this fake image?

Two reasons: The people in the pic look more or less like our real ourselves. The synthesized photo shows the process of discussing highly conceptual approaches, which was our everyday for 10 years or so.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#63
post #12

Weird they don't name Jon Sneyers - a person pivotal in creation of JPEG XL Here's a blog post by him: https://cloudinary.com/blog/2026-the-year-of-jpeg-xl

No, it is normal. Similarly Jon's blog post does not name any of us by name.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#64
post #2

That's rich coming from the company that tried to kill it. The audacity...

We (Google) built JPEG XL (together with Cloudinary). The main photography mode and the JPEG compatibility mode is from Google.

Chrome decided not to be an early adopter for good reasons that they have publicly documented, but that did nothing to JPEG XL. Particularly, it did not kill JPEG XL. Others, DNG, DICOM, PDF, EPUB, iOS, Safari, etc. integrated it early regardless.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You say that as though Google isn't notorious for killing their own successful and well received products for seemingly no reason. It's incontrovertible that Google did attempt to kill browser adoption of jxl at one point. Thankfully they seem to have reversed course.

They only reversed under pressure from the Safari and Firefox folks. The killing of JXL did push the ever-talented Jyrki to create jpegli, which was honestly a wonder.

Thank you.

Jpegli is still a hidden gem. People don't yet understand how great it is.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#66

AI slop article

I wrote it, with some help from Gemini as my own English is clumsy and expensive to correct manually, and created the "photo" and the "chart". I am to blame. I thought the story of a 10+ year running OSS project with intermediate milestones would be fascinating for people.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#67
post #22

I personally think something like the qok format is a better way to go. Make something that performs well and is dirt simple to implement.

No it would not, qoi falls behind even my 2011 WebP lossless design.

Also, it is not a competition for the shortest specification. If it was, still good. Jpeg xl spec is about half the size of the original jpeg spec.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#68
post #27

Mostly off topic, but why is the spec for JPEG and JPEG XL paywalled? I wouldn't call them open standards if they're not available free-of-charge to the public.

It's a standard ISO Standard thing which could perhaps be justified when standards where printed on paper. The JPEG XL team released a draft to try to work around this but couldn't avoid it for the official standard release.

Does anyone know why the JPEG XL team went through ISO instead of publishing it themselves?

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#69
post #49

The sloppa in this article is... offending. The obvious AI headings, pointless genned image of people (I'm starting to think islam had a point with discouraging depictions of human figures), and especially the blurry, artifacted, distractingly skeuomorphic diagram, with random wire traces going everywhere... this is a technical blog, not an investor sales pitch! Every time I see one of these, I have to double-check f…

I spent 10+ years in building JPEG XL and I'm proud of the result. It wasn't always easy times. It is not so bad people can see what I look like and take a peek what the process was to get there. This article is not about the entropy codes and predictors, memory bandwidth and decision trees, but about the long horizon planning in corporate-driven OSS efforts and being connected to both community and cross-industry.

That doesn't sound like a denial to me. Your years working on JPEGXL are extremely admirable, and you deserve to be recognized for it, but the gratuitous use of genAI in this post is also insulting to humans. The world isn't improved by a fabricated photo of a fake setting with an actor looks like you but isn't standing in front of a white board that says basically nothing.

Re: Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding

#70
post #53
post #2

That's rich coming from the company that tried to kill it. The audacity...

For context, Google initially refused to merge JpegXL as a strategy play to promote AVIF, which was in use by other teams (i think Photos?). Internally, chrome engineers were supportive of jxl but were overridden by leadership. I guess today’s post represents a change. I don’t have any public evidence to support my claim, sorry. Take it or leave it

I think it is quite the opposite. There were some support of JXL but leadership of Google, Android and Chrome all wanted AVIF.

It was a perfect opportunity to announced AVIF with AV2, may be taking the chance to fix issues that JXL wins AV1. But that didn't happen.

Post reply on HN