4 ms·
Don't ignore the fact that unlike WebP (lossless: missing grayscale | lossy: forced 4:2:0 chroma subsampling =x | both: missing metadata and progressive) and AV
by a-french-anon 3y ago
Don't ignore the fact that unlike WebP (lossless: missing grayscale | lossy: forced 4:2:0 chroma subsampling =x | both: missing metadata and progressive) and AVIF (lossless: worse than PNG in many cases, i.e. useless), it's both a very good PNG and JPEG replacement; only AVIF wins in my books are very low bpp lossy quality (not very interesting), hardware decoding support and dav1d being amazing.
I seriously see JXL as a "keep it for 50 years" codec to replace our aging tech.
- JyrkiAlakuijala 3y agoWebP lossless as a format has two or three efficient ways of encoding grayscale (subtract green mode, palette, perhaps cross color decorrelation would work, too). Perhaps the libwebp APIs don't make it obvious. Density should be quite a bit better than with PNG.
- a-french-anon 3y agoIndeed, that wasn't obvious it was using tricks to improve the situation. But I do remember in my tests PNG beating Webp when using gray8 input. I mean, Webp must store an RGBA tuple for each pixel, even for grayscale without alpha, right?