5 ms·
Dropbox's Lepton [1][2], an additional lossless compression layer that operates on top of JPEG, would make for a smoother transition. If a browser natively sup
by niftich 10y ago
Dropbox's Lepton [1][2], an additional lossless compression layer that operates on top of JPEG, would make for a smoother transition.
If a browser natively supported Lepton, you could serve the compressed version over the wire, and still get the bit-exact original .jpg out at the end, if the user wanted to save the file.
Of course, browser support doesn't exist yet. But browser implementors, consider the gains. This isn't promoting an incompatible format, it's getting bandwidth savings while being fully backwards compatible.
[1] https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech/2016/07/lepton-image-compression-saving-22-losslessly-from-images-at-15mbs/ https://blogs.dropbox.com/tech/2016/07/lepton-image-compress... [2] https://github.com/dropbox/lepton https://github.com/dropbox/lepton
- Scaevolus 10y agoThere's not really much point to supporting Lepton directly instead of WebP. It's (approximately) a JPEG converted losslessly into a WebP variant-- it uses a predictor very similar to the VP8 inter-block predictor and the VP8 arithmetic coder. WebP is based on VP8, so it uses the same technologies.
- niftich 10y agoI'd argue the exact opposite: the two use nearly equivalent methods, but one of them is completely backwards compatible with JPEG, while the other one... isn't.
- Scaevolus 10y agoThe ability to losslessly convert it between another format doesn't seem that relevant for a browser-- you still need to deploy new software to support it, at which point you might as well just use something more efficient than JPEG. Remember, the compression is lossy to begin with.