3 ms·

I think the suggestion is that the client could just stop downloading at a set threshold, maybe taking current bandwidth, cost, etc. into consideration. Judgin

I think the suggestion is that the client could just stop downloading at a set threshold, maybe taking current bandwidth, cost, etc. into consideration. Judging from the video, something like that could work very well (and much better than with progressive jpegs).

radarsat1 11y ago
But how is that different from progressive JPEG?
guelo 11y ago
It's an interesting concept. But I'm not sure how it could work. Resizing introduces artifacts so best quality is always going to be achieved by reencoding for different resolutions. Also, how would the client know when to stop downloading?
- iopq 11y ago
  The client would download the first 1KB for an icon, 4K for a thumbnail and the whole image for the full size. The best part is that all of those are actually the same file, not separate embedded thumbnails inside the file. The client could decide BY ITSELF to download only 2K for a thumbnail because it's currently on 3g.
  - guelo 11y ago
    Where are you getting 1KB and 4KB from? The compression is highly dependent on the image so there's no way to know the quality of the thumbnail image.
    - iopq 11y ago
      Maybe a future version of the format would specify useful cut-off points for browsers to make the decision inside the header. Then the browser can decide to download 4K version on wifi and 1K version on 3g.
- hansjorg 11y ago
  You'd need to set the thresholds in the file manually, based on the artists judgement of quality. It would take a few extra seconds when creating it, but could save both bandwidth and create a better user experience on mobile.
  - magicalist 11y ago
    This will have to be automated or it's going to be really annoying for development. To eliminate that, maybe the file format could incorporate some internal tags for good size thresholds, or even just a handful of coefficients at the beginning for a simple curve approximating the byte-to-resolution mapping.

radarsat1 11y ago

But how is that different from progressive JPEG?

guelo 11y ago

It's an interesting concept. But I'm not sure how it could work. Resizing introduces artifacts so best quality is always going to be achieved by reencoding for different resolutions. Also, how would the client know when to stop downloading?

iopq 11y ago
The client would download the first 1KB for an icon, 4K for a thumbnail and the whole image for the full size. The best part is that all of those are actually the same file, not separate embedded thumbnails inside the file. The client could decide BY ITSELF to download only 2K for a thumbnail because it's currently on 3g.
- guelo 11y ago
  Where are you getting 1KB and 4KB from? The compression is highly dependent on the image so there's no way to know the quality of the thumbnail image.
  - iopq 11y ago
    Maybe a future version of the format would specify useful cut-off points for browsers to make the decision inside the header. Then the browser can decide to download 4K version on wifi and 1K version on 3g.
hansjorg 11y ago
You'd need to set the thresholds in the file manually, based on the artists judgement of quality. It would take a few extra seconds when creating it, but could save both bandwidth and create a better user experience on mobile.
- magicalist 11y ago
  This will have to be automated or it's going to be really annoying for development. To eliminate that, maybe the file format could incorporate some internal tags for good size thresholds, or even just a handful of coefficients at the beginning for a simple curve approximating the byte-to-resolution mapping.