3 ms·

> FLIF is a novel lossless image format which outperforms PNG, lossless WebP, lossless BPG, lossless JPEG2000, and lossless JPEG XR in terms of compression rati

by rattray 10y ago

> FLIF is a novel lossless image format which outperforms PNG, lossless WebP, lossless BPG, lossless JPEG2000, and lossless JPEG XR in terms of compression ratio. > 74% smaller than lossless JPEG XR compression. > Works on any kind of image

jacobolus 10y ago
> outperforms PNG, lossless WebP, lossless BPG, lossless JPEG2000, and lossless JPEG XR PNG was not designed to be used for photograph-like images. The rest of those were not designed to be lossless formats, the lossless version is just a tacked-on afterthought. Very unsurprising to find a codec that can beat those.
- are595 10y ago
  In my own tests, I found FLIF generally beats PNG (PNG Crush/Optipng both in brute-force mode) for comics (greyscale, majority white) as well, but by a less significant margin. It's also worth noting that there aren't many other lossless formats, so it's still a valid comparison. I'm sure neither TIFF nor RAW outperform FLIF either.
  - rleigh 10y ago
    That's not a valid comparison for TIFF. TIFF is a container which supports multiple compression algorithms. You could plug FLIF in as a compression algorithm and use it directly.
    - are595 10y ago
      Alright, well against current commonly supported TIFF compression algorithms such as LZW, Packbits, and ZIP.
manigandham 10y ago
It also loads progressively and has a novel feature that lets a client determine how much detail to render, then stop loading any more data, all while using the same file. http://flif.info/example.html http://flif.info/example.html
- usrusr 10y ago
  This would be a totally awesome feature if the quality of a truncated FLIF came anywhere close to files tailored to that size in “real“ lossy formats. Unfortunately, according to that example page, truncated FLIF falls far behind. It might find a niche where data reduction and scale reduction fall together (the last example)

by rattray 10y ago

jacobolus 10y ago

> outperforms PNG, lossless WebP, lossless BPG, lossless JPEG2000, and lossless JPEG XR PNG was not designed to be used for photograph-like images. The rest of those were not designed to be lossless formats, the lossless version is just a tacked-on afterthought. Very unsurprising to find a codec that can beat those.

are595 10y ago
In my own tests, I found FLIF generally beats PNG (PNG Crush/Optipng both in brute-force mode) for comics (greyscale, majority white) as well, but by a less significant margin. It's also worth noting that there aren't many other lossless formats, so it's still a valid comparison. I'm sure neither TIFF nor RAW outperform FLIF either.
- rleigh 10y ago
  That's not a valid comparison for TIFF. TIFF is a container which supports multiple compression algorithms. You could plug FLIF in as a compression algorithm and use it directly.
  - are595 10y ago
    Alright, well against current commonly supported TIFF compression algorithms such as LZW, Packbits, and ZIP.

manigandham 10y ago

It also loads progressively and has a novel feature that lets a client determine how much detail to render, then stop loading any more data, all while using the same file. http://flif.info/example.html http://flif.info/example.html

usrusr 10y ago
This would be a totally awesome feature if the quality of a truncated FLIF came anywhere close to files tailored to that size in “real“ lossy formats. Unfortunately, according to that example page, truncated FLIF falls far behind. It might find a niche where data reduction and scale reduction fall together (the last example)