If only there were an image format
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/commonly-confused-words/was-vs-were/
webp is a fine format, blame the websites that disallow webp upload, but then proceed to convert the image to webp anyway
< Insert XKCD comic strip about new standards here >
Cloudflare zero trust apps allow webp images on initial creation, then arbitrarily disallow webp on edit. You can’t edit until you replace the image you already uploaded, and the system accepted.
I blame Google for killing JPEG XL in favor of webp
Webp is good and this meme is shit and played out
DAT and DDC were great as well. Beta too. But sometimes good enough (like JPG and VHS) is good enough.
Yeah, let’s stick with obsolete (JPEG) formats, so no one needs to improve their loaders (very hard), and people can continue to use that funny video editor that came with some old version of Windows without converters (very evil, Irfanview does not have the same meme potential as WinRAR).
JPG-XL crying in the corner.
If Jpeg-XL was backwards compatible with older clients, it would probably take off. Like if the format embedded a standard jpeg image in the front readable by older clients, and then enhanced it with additional data at end of file readable by Jpeg-XL clients.
> complains about lossy format
> meme uses lossless imageAm disappoint
To be clear, webp isn’t even a lossy format. I mean, it can be, but it can also be lossless.
I really don’t get the WebP hate, it’s a good format. It’s better than PNG and JPG.
Though you couldn’t set the bar any lower without it turning into a joke.
Anyhow, to quote Wikipedia:
Comparing different encodings (JPEG, x264, and WebP) of a reference image, she stated that the quality of the WebP-encoded result was the worst of the three, mostly because of blurriness on the image. […] In October 2013, Josh Aas from Mozilla Research published a comprehensive study of current lossy encoding techniques and was not able to conclude that WebP outperformed JPEG by any significant margin
All while having significantly increased complexity. The blurriness problem was inherited from the video codec webp was based on. When you can’t beat an 18 years old format, don’t be surprised when people get irritated when you use your position to get it mandated into a standard, while later stalling actual improvements (JPEG XL).
It’s just tech illiterate being “oh no my image program not open this 10 year old new format”
JPEG-XL exists, is factually better, and is not patent encumbered.
How is WebP “patent encumbered”? It’s an open format.
Open is not the same as patent-free, the two things can coexist (and they do in the case of webp).
It’s open to write the code, but in order to be authorized to use it you have to get a permit from Google. You can’t eg.: fork from Firefox and use their permit (as you implicitly could with patent-free). Plus, Google can rescind their patent grant at any point, which they are bound to do once they secure ownership of the internet.
That’s just not true.
That’s still not patent free. Heck it’s right there: “irrevocable (unless we say so)”.
I didn’t say it was patent free, and the text doesn’t say “unless we say so”. It explicitly says the only way the patent grants can be revoked is if you enter patent litigation or enforcement regarding this code.
If you or your agent or exclusive licensee institute or order or agree to the institution of patent litigation or any other patent enforcement activity against any entity (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that any of these implementations of WebM or any code incorporated within any of these implementations of WebM constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement, or inducement of patent infringement, then any patent rights granted to you under this License for these implementations of WebM shall terminate as of the date such litigation is filed.
That is still a problem, but what I was responding to:
It’s open to write the code, but in order to be authorized to use it you have to get a permit from Google. You can’t eg.: fork from Firefox and use their permit (as you implicitly could with patent-free). Plus, Google can rescind their patent grant at any point, which they are bound to do once they secure ownership of the internet.
is just wrong.
I have no problem with calling out Google’s anticompetitive behaviors, even in this case, but don’t lie about it.
Yes, but that is actually almost “incompatible with every app and website”
A file format can not, by itself, be “incompatible” with a website. What matters is the browser, and Firefox at least is adding support (slowly), and they are the ones who matter ATM.
does jpeg xl support animated images?
It does, yes, but from what I gather it’s rather difficult to actually encode such an animated image compared to, say, a GIF. Display should work just fine.
PNG is lossless, so isn’t that like comparing apples to oranges?
Edit: Apparently webp can also be lossless. I don’t know anything.
Quality loss? Webp supports lossless.
So does JPEG. It doesn’t mean that people (will) use it for that.
The posting of webps will continue until support improves.
What - doesn’t - support webp at this point? P much all maintained open source software has for years upon years, os x has for years, Android and iOS have for ages as well, even windows added support a year ago or so supposedly.
Like are these memes made by confused time travelers?
It’s often a nightmare when sharing to chat apps to show friends memes etc
a) send links instead of polluting my storage with garbage, please
b) use Signal, it does webpFor the first point, I’m just going to throw out that sending the content can be preferable given how likely the link is to go dead eventually. There are a number of things I can no longer find because of this although it is admittedly an edge case.
Well yeah, but for memes, longevity isn’t really a priority.
It somewhat is for me, my partner takes days or weeks to click my links.
Sounds rough
Well, yeah, but for memes longevity isn’t really a priority imo.
even windows added support a year ago or so supposedly
You answered your own question. I spent years playing the game of “This image is a JPEG. Will the website force me to save it in a format that can’t be opened by the basic Windows photo viewer, or will it actually be a JPEG when I download it?”
You’d be surprised how often it would turn out to be the former rather than the latter.
Discord doesn’t and a lot of other apps neither
Discord supports webp. I use it regularly.
Then is it Samsung’s flavor of android that is to blame ?
Might be, that one I can’t test, I don’t have any samsung devices.
I’ve never had an issue with webp on Samsung devices, either in Discord or not.
WebP has all the functionality of jpg, png, and gif while still being a smaller filesize. It has baseline support across browsers and devices. I’m no Google simp and work to de-google my family and workplace but this is a hill I will die on. Webp currently the best image file format.
If loser companies would support it I’d say AV1 Image File Format (AVIF) is the best.
Webp currently the best image file format.
Out of the widely supported ones, it’s quite good, yeah. Overall, I’d say JPEG XL is the better one. Ironically, only Safari supports it out of the box. Firefox requires a Nightly version with tweaking in
about:config. Chrome used to have a feature flag, but has since removed it.The website mentions
Migrating to JPEG XL reduces storage costs because servers can store a single JPEG XL file to serve both JPEG and JPEG XL clients.
Does anyone know how that works?
I assume, decoding it on the fly? It’s possible to encode a JPEG as a JPEG XL losslessly.
For me it’s HEIF. I love it because it’s smaller and higher quality than JPEG, but literally nothing supports this format. It’s annoying that I have to convert to JPEG or PNG to do anything with my images. Luckily HEVC seems to get more support on the video end of things.
Takes forever to encode though
Yeah, almost as long as AV1, depending upon settings.
I hate that Messenger doesn’t support webp. Makes sharing from Lemmy quite annoying. Signal takes webp though, no prob.
The first part is wrong. And the second part is mostly wrong. Stop whining
Pro tip: If discord is complaing your screenshots are too large convert them to avif or webp. Now you don’t need nitro
I have never had a screenshot exceeding 40 MB. That is humongous.
What if I want to screenshot my cocaine-fueled rant to my ex and mistakenly send it to said ex instead of my homies?
If you screenshot computer/phone interfaces (text, buttons, lots of flat colors with adjacent pixels the exact same color), the default PNG algorithm does a great job of keeping the file size small. If you screenshot a photograph, though, the PNG algorithm makes the file size huge, because it’s just really poorly optimized for re-encoding images that are already JPG.
I took a screenshot of this page
(Screenshot removed because it takes forever to load and is not interesting enough to waste bandwidth on)
I am connected to a 4K monitor and this picture is also at 3775 × 2119. The total file size:
12.1 MB
Still a pretty limited palette, everyone wearing the same color shirts.
PNG tends to fail hard with textures. For example, my preferred theme in my chess app, which has some wood grain textures, generates huge screenshot file sizes (2MB), whereas the default might be less than 10% as large. Similarly, when I screenshot this image the file size jumps to 2MB for a 0.8 megapixel image.
Rendered textured scenes could easily overload the PNG compression algorithm to where they’re huge, and if Discord is historically associated with gaming, one can imagine certain video game screenshots blasting past that 40mb limit.
Screenshoting modded minecraft on a 4k panel does it reliably for me
Webp has both a lossy and lossless mode so the first part of this meme is lost on me
I guess that was the lossy part :)
| | | | | | _
Never understood why jepgXL didn’t win out
Because Google didn’t invent it, and Google decides what does and doesn’t get added to the Internet.
It’s slowly marching along with the reimplementation of its reference decoder in rust. That should hopefully satisfy google and mozilla’s demands and get them to adopt it in their browsers.
The compression technique it used was patented, and the licence fee was extortionate. By the time the patent expired, other, royalty-free, techniques were available that outperformed it.You’re thinking of jpeg2000
Oops. I’d somehow missed that there was now a third kind of JPEG.
