> Their claims about Jpegli seem to make WebP obsolete regarding lossy encoding? Similar compression estimates as WebP versus JPEG are brought up. I believe Jp

> Their claims about Jpegli seem to make WebP obsolete regarding lossy encoding? Similar compression estimates as WebP versus JPEG are brought up. I believe Jpegli beats WebP for medium to high quality compression. I would guess that more than half of all WebP images on the net would definitely be smaller as Jpegli-encoded JPEGs of similar quality. And note that Jpegli is actually worse than MozJPEG and libjpeg-turbo at medium-low qualities. Something like libjpeg-turbo q75 is the crossover point I believe. > Hell, I question if AVIF is even worth it with Jpegli. According to another test [1], for large (like 10+ Mpix) photographs compressed with high quality, Jpegli wins over AVIF. But AVIF seems to win for "web size" images. Though, as for point 2 in your next paragraph, Jpegli is indeed much faster than AVIF. > JPEG XL would've still been worth it though because it's just covering so much more ground than JPEG/Jpegli and it has a streaming decoder like a sensible format geared for Internet use, as well as progressive decoding support for mobile networks. Indeed. At a minimum, JXL gives you another 20% size reduction just from the better entropy coding. [1] https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-and-the-pareto-front https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-and-the-pareto-front