4 ms·
Are there any recent third party comparisons between x264, WebP and JPEG encoded images like this one from September 2010 [1] by Jacob Garrett-Glaser? From the
by tylerritchie 15y ago
Are there any recent third party comparisons between x264, WebP and JPEG encoded images like this one from September 2010 [1] by Jacob Garrett-Glaser?
From the WebP gallery [2], it looks like JPEG and WebP are pretty comparable for those selections of images (with Nærøyfjorden, Norway having the greatest difference). The comparison study [3] looks favorable to WebP at all comparable SSIM.
Is anyone familiar offhand with the algorithmic complexity of WebP compared to JPEG?
And finally, does the 16383x16383 maximum WebP resolution limit WebP (compared to JPEG at 65535x65535), or will that limit increase as the ability to easily create gigapixel images increases?
[1] http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/541 http://x264dev.multimedia.cx/archives/541
[2] http://code.google.com/speed/webp/gallery.html http://code.google.com/speed/webp/gallery.html
[3] http://code.google.com/speed/webp/docs/webp_study.html http://code.google.com/speed/webp/docs/webp_study.html
- sp332 15y agoGoogle doesn't seem to be interested in addressing the limitations of WebP, like the 16383-pixel limit or only supporting 4:2:0 chroma subsampling. I think the use-case is: run all your images through the converter, and if they're not bigger and don't look like crap, then you might as well use it. Not exactly compelling... On the other hand, the algorithms have a lot of room for improvement, so it might make sense to focus on those for a while and worry about less-common cases (like huge images) later.