5 ms·
There's a neat table on https://jpegxl.info/ https://jpegxl.info/ which shows all features of both formats. In general JXL has more features than AVIF, although
by vanderZwan 3y ago
There's a neat table on https://jpegxl.info/ https://jpegxl.info/ which shows all features of both formats. In general JXL has more features than AVIF, although some of them may be more important for special purposes like medical imaging.
- iLoveOncall 3y agoAnd I'm sure we can expect a perfectly unbiased opinion regarding the matter from jpegxl.info.
- vanderZwan 3y agoIn which world are technical features like "how many channels the format supports" or "maximum bit depth" or "progressive decoding" opinions, exactly?
- jdiff 3y agoYou can pick and choose which facts to present or misrepresent which/what is important but... that's not going on here. JXL is actually just better by very many metrics. It's only lacking in adoption. There's not something that jpeg-xl.info is ignoring or glossing over. This is just lazy cynicism.
- iLoveOncall 3y agoI was mostly joking, but you can compare a skateboard and a car and make the skateboard look better if you just mention weight and pollution but not top speed, autonomy, etc.
- vanderZwan 3y agoWell, ok, that's a fair point: from this table alone you can't say anything about computational complexity or implementation difficulty. And I cannot honestly say anything about that. I agree that it's a valid question to ask. I'm afraid that your first reply misfired a bit if that was what you wanted to get across though.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- eviks 3y agoVery good and informative table indeed, great base from which to start the codec comparison, pity it's an image and not fully interactive with extra info