3 ms·
You missed the point he's making: webp requires 30% more data to achieve the same dynamic than jpeg, so there's no real use for it.
by rahen 3y ago
You missed the point he's making: webp requires 30% more data to achieve the same dynamic than jpeg, so there's no real use for it.
- bawolff 3y agoDid he make that point? The only time he thought they were equivalent was when using lossless mode, which is not a reasonable comparison. He never actually compared webp at 30% more quality than jpeg.
- rahen 3y ago> "WebP is actually 39 % heavier than JPEG 85 plus noise for a similar-ish look on this difficult picture, and still not totally as smooth as the JPEG (there is still a tiny bit of ringing). It’s also 30 % heavier than JPEG 90 with simple Floyd-Steinberg dithering."
- iainmerrick 3y agoHe did, about halfway through: WebP [lossy, 96] is actually 39 % heavier than JPEG 85 plus noise for a similar-ish look on this difficult picture, and still not totally as smooth as the JPEG (there is still a tiny bit of ringing). It’s also 30 % heavier than JPEG 90 with simple Floyd-Steinberg dithering.