Firefox 93.0

Posted Oct 6, 2021 3:31 UTC (Wed) by pabs (subscriber, #43278)
In reply to: Firefox 93.0 by ldearquer
Parent article: Firefox 93.0

I wonder when JPEG XL will take off. It is supposedly better than the video codec derived image formats like AVIF/webp/etc.

Firefox 93.0

Posted Oct 6, 2021 3:55 UTC (Wed) by jhoblitt (subscriber, #77733) [Link]

I think the bit format has changed during the standardization process, which may have discouraged early adoption. I also wonder if there are patent concerns which haven't been publicly expressed.

Firefox 93.0

Posted Oct 6, 2021 4:58 UTC (Wed) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (2 responses)

To clarify, it's vastly superior at being able to stand in for PNG, or being able to present very high quality, but yet lossy images. The video image formats like webp, heif, avif, can't do either of these tasks at all.

For the "okay image" those formats are currently used for, they might remain a better choice. Though the progressive display and cheap encodes might win some over even in that space.

Firefox 93.0

Posted Oct 6, 2021 6:06 UTC (Wed) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link] (1 responses)

The ability to be losslessly converted to JPEG and back but with lower size is quite interesting too.

Higher-than-Perfect compression?

Posted Oct 6, 2021 13:12 UTC (Wed) by cagrazia (guest, #124754) [Link]

> The ability to be losslessly converted to JPEG and back but with lower size is quite interesting too.

So we will be able to store whatever image in 1 byte only, just by chaining conversion to/from JPEG? Awesome :)

JPEG XL -- FLIF FUIF

Posted Oct 6, 2021 19:08 UTC (Wed) by stephen.pollei (subscriber, #125364) [Link] (3 responses)

I heard that JPEG XL incorporates ideas from flif Free Lossless Image Format and FUIF Free Universal Image Format . FLIF seemed interesting when I heard about it years ago. I was interested in its ability to be progressive. If an image was used as icon then it could get by reading only a small portion of the file.

JPEG XL -- FLIF FUIF

Posted Oct 7, 2021 4:05 UTC (Thu) by pabs (subscriber, #43278) [Link]

JPEG XL is progressive too, and one of the more interesting aspects of it.

JPEG XL -- FLIF FUIF

Posted Oct 9, 2021 21:54 UTC (Sat) by k8to (guest, #15413) [Link] (1 responses)

Jpeg xl has a strong progressive decode story both for lossy and lossless images. I don't believe this has been implemented everywhere jpeg xl has been implemented yet.

JPEG XL -- FLIF FUIF

Posted Oct 18, 2021 3:26 UTC (Mon) by flussence (guest, #85566) [Link]

The ability to pause and resume downloading a JXL image to increase resolution on demand sounds like a perfect fit for some of HTTP/2's new flow control features too; I'd expect the web performance hyper-miling crowd to be all over that. You could technically do the partial download thing with an interlaced/progressive image in any of the 90s formats, but my understanding is the FLIF algorithm is designed to look better when used that way, and it isn't optional like the others.

Also sounds like it'd be a way to simplify the current desktop icon mess (shipping raster iconsets with a folder forest for sizes up to 1024x1024 has never stopped being ridiculous IMO)