12 ms·
XYB JPEG: Perceptual Color Encoding Tested
- computerbuster 3y agoHow does the new cjpegli encoder using the XYB color space stack up compared to the competition?
- brucethemoose2 3y agoThat is crazy indeed. I can't remember, do the other encoders automatically change the chroma subsampling? XYB JPEG peaks pretty hard at specific bpp ranges depending on the subsampling. Also, things like this make me wonder what other tasks would be better in XYB colorspace. BM3D, for instance, performs best in "opponent" color space: https://github.com/HomeOfVapourSynthEvolution/VapourSynth-BM3D https://github.com/HomeOfVapourSynthEvolution/VapourSynth-BM...
- computerbuster 3y agomozjpeg automatically handles chroma subsampling, scaling up from 4:2:0 to 4:2:2 & then 4:4:4. WebP is 4:2:0 only, AVIF is 4:4:4 only (as tested) & I believe JXL doesn't subsample at all.
- yboris 3y agoIn the article they mention JPEG XL (aka .jxl) format that I hope everyone knows about: https://jpegxl.info/ https://jpegxl.info/ It is supported by Adobe, included in Safari 17, is behind a flag in Firefox, and was behind a flag in Chrome too until they idiotically chose to remove it despite severe pushback from the community. My take is that it will be one of the most-popular image formats in the coming decade.
- bryanrasmussen 3y agogiven Chrome's stranglehold how do you see it becoming one of the most popular image formats in the coming decade.
- zokier 3y agoDecisions lightly made can be lightly reversed. It's not exactly hell freezes over situation to see jxl reintroduced to Chrome
- agos 3y agoh.264 did pretty well even if Chrome decided not to support it
- brucethemoose2 3y agoThe situation was a bit different, as (IIRC) h.264 already had an enormous amount of usage. JXL is basically starting from zero.
- cubefox 3y agoBecause it was used in Blu-ray discs, streaming apps, and TV. But JPEG and any successor is mostly a format for the Web and thus web browsers.
- yboris 3y agoTheir decision is schizophrenic: the JPEG XL format is a combination of two technologies: PIK (developed by Google) and FLIF (developed by Cloudinary) - one of them developed by Google. It is entirely sensible for them to reverse their decision, which came before Safari announced the format would be supported. Adobe is already supporting the format, and many image editors / browsers are including it. Finally, adding a WASM polyfil to your website would still yield many benefits, enough to outweigh not-100%-yet-support-by-browsers.
- themerone 3y agoNot schizophrenic, it was political. The guy behind web-p has more clout with the chrome team.
- carbotaniuman 3y agoFrom my very very limited understanding, the amount of influence webp (compared to even say AVIF) people have seems disproportionate compared to how useful it's been.
- 8n4vidtmkvmk 3y agoI hope I can start saving game screenshots in JXL soon. Pretty sure the HDR is lost when saving as jpeg.
- zokier 3y ago> Pretty sure the HDR is lost when saving as jpeg. Nvidia can capture HDR screenshots in JXR format in supported games.
- llm_nerd 3y agoThe clear winner here is JPEG XL, which is fully supported in iOS 17 and will have a billion+ capable clients by end of year. JPEG XL has HDR, is the best codec for photographic type content in all but extremely low file size, is the best codec for cartoon/chart style graphics, has a container that is enormously flexible (want to store a channel for depth or for object detection? You can do it).
- yboris 3y agoConfirming that JPEG XL is a winner. Here's one of the main developers of the format, Jon Sneyers, writing 3 days ago: JPEG XL: How It Started, How It’s Going https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-how-it-started-how-its-going https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-how-it-started-how-its-g...
- cubefox 3y agoWhile JPEG XL is great in most aspects, in terms of file size AVIF is substantially smaller at medium image quality. AVIF has a lot of problems though, e.g. no progressive image loading or limited resolution. The situation is really frustrating, since there is only a once-in-multiple-decades chance to replace JPEG and PNG, and this chance should better be met with a format that is great at everything. Because if it succeeds, we will be stuck with its shortcomings for a long time, just as we were stuck with JPEG for decades.
- srgpqt 3y ago> a format that is great at everything I too want a magical flying unicorn, and maybe we can make one in the next 40 years, but in the mean time I will happily accept to be stuck with a magical jpegxl unicorn that can’t fly.
- cubefox 3y agoYou get your unicorn only if it can fly. Otherwise the Chrome team gives you a flying donkey. A non-flying unicorn happens to be not on the table.
- 3y ago
- LoganDark 3y agowonder if there is a perceptual color system that accounts for the rare fourth color receptor... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Tetrachromacy_in_carriers_of_CVD https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachromacy#Tetrachromacy_in... don't know if that would be reproducible on a regular RGB display, though
- orbital-decay 3y agoThere isn't even a way to account for individual differences, let alone for things like tetrachromacy. Color blindness is probably easier (at least crudely), but AFAIK it also varies between the same types. So unless you profile your perception individually, we're stuck with the biggest cluster of the "average human vision system".
- cubefox 3y ago> don't know if that would be reproducible on a regular RGB display, though It wouldn't, and also not with standard camera sensors. The RGB subpixels correspond to the main wave length sensitivity of the three color cells in the eye. I think for tetrachromy there is a fourth cell for UV light with shorter wavelength than blue. There is no way to support this with our current tech stack.
- LoganDark 3y agothis reminds me of how designing for "the average human" leaves out anyone with even slightly superhuman capabilities, and how frustrating this is for us when our capabilities surpass what designers thought were good enough. for us, this happens frequently with monitor PPI and HMD PPD, but i can imagine someone with tetrachromy theoretically being able to perceive colors that computers can't reproduce, and wondering why computers lack these colors, only to find that this is supposedly an impossibility that was optimized out as an example, apple's new HMD advertises things that simply can't possibly be true, so we probably won't be getting one any time soon. there's zero reason to upgrade from a simple hp reverb g2 when the only difference between two blurry headsets is that one of them costs four times more. we'd rather be conscious of this than try to fix it when no solution currently exists this isn't saying displays for tetrachromy should have been the norm, as that's very wasteful on most people. but maybe displays for tetrachromy could have existed, somewhere, in some market, just like tech devices with placebo-level specs tend to exist in some market
- tambourine_man 3y agoImages are completely green in Safari 15 and Photoshop. Works fine in Chrome and Firefox