4 ms·
While the collaboration between Google and Cloudinary is very welcome and the JPEG standardisation will accelerate adoption, it would be nice to see a compariso
by The_rationalist 5y ago
While the collaboration between Google and Cloudinary is very welcome and the JPEG standardisation will accelerate adoption, it would be nice to see a comparison of JPEG XL versus FLIF/FUIF, it doesn't seem to have improved over it and it is unclear if it retains all features such as progressive decoding of animated images Cf https://flif.info/animation.html https://flif.info/animation.html
- ByTheBook 5y agoWell, the author of FLIF/FUIF, Jon Sneyers, is actually a large contributor to Jpeg XL, and from what I've seen he thinks Jpeg XL is superior.
- The_rationalist 5y agoInteresting, any source? I wonder in what way he finds it superior.
- ByTheBook 5y agoHe's written about it in his blog: https://cloudinary.com/blog/author/jon_sneyers https://cloudinary.com/blog/author/jon_sneyers
- jonsneyers 5y agoJPEG XL's Modular mode is based on the best elements of FLIF/FUIF and lossless WebP. For lossless compression, it does improve quite significantly over FLIF, see e.g. https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ju4q1WkaXT7WoxZINmQpf4ElgMD2VMlqeDN2DuZ6yJ8/edit#gid=174429822 https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ju4q1WkaXT7WoxZINmQp... (FLIF is on average 7.2% larger than JXL, and for some categories like pixel art the gap is larger). It also decodes significantly faster, and it has fast encode options that make it more suitable as a PNG replacement in image authoring use cases where density is not the most important thing. Progressive animation is a neat feature of FLIF but it is totally impractical in terms of decode speed and memory consumption. In general I think animation is better handled with video codecs (with multiple resolutions/bitrates to cover various devices/network conditions).