5 ms·

Firefox 152 Now Available with JPEG-XL Support

52 points by eln1 5mo ago

intelkishan 5mo ago
How is the support for JPEG-XL across other browsers and local photo viewer applications?
- eln1 5mo ago
  Sure, most, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL#Official_software_support https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL#Official_software_supp...
  - esperent 5mo ago
    > As of 2026, web browsers that support JPEG XL had 14% market share From your link.
    - throawayonthe 5mo ago
      https://caniuse.com/jpeg https://caniuse.com/jpeg huh, yeah, says 14.12%... i could have sworn it's on by default in chromium now? it worked in my browser! nevermind, i had the flag enabled previously :/ https://jpegxl.info/resources/jpeg-xl-test-page.html https://jpegxl.info/resources/jpeg-xl-test-page.html
- brokenmachine 5mo ago
  https://caniuse.com/?search=jpeg-xl https://caniuse.com/?search=jpeg-xl Doesn't look very good.
  - eln1 5mo ago
    Waiting for enabled by default in Firefox (already in nightly 153) and Chrome (hopefully this year).
nextaccountic 5mo ago
Is there any hardware accelerated jpeg xl implementation? Like VA-API's VAProfileJPEGBaseline for jpeg
- throawayonthe 5mo ago
  could you tell more/point to resources about hw-accel jpegs? does it make a difference for some sort of pipeline/batch operations or 'normal' use too? are there issues with some jpeg features being unsupported? i haven't heard almost anything about this
  - nextaccountic 5mo ago
    it's a throughput thing yes, or in my case it's also a desire to not hog the cpu with bulk image processing features like progressive jpegs and some color spaces aren't supported. I think it could be but it isn't and not sure why jpegs found in the wild will typically not make use of hardware acceleration or use just it for a subset of the decoding (not sure about the details). browsers didn't bother using hardware acceleration for jpegs just for the images that can be processed fine so it is meant for jpegs you control rather than jpegs you find on the web. unless you convert them yourself
jadecarter68 5mo ago
I've been testing JPEG-XL on nightly, it's a lifesaver for high-res photos. Half the size of PNG with no quality loss.
- nateb2022 5mo ago
  What sites already are using JPEG-XL en masse?
y2244 5mo ago
As an aside - My Firefox updated the other day and now has no sign up VPN built in with multiple countries available to choose. Very welcome feature.
ksec 5mo ago
Considering Apple's support and product cycle. You are looking at a Billion devices supporting JPEG XL between now and end of next year. It might be low in percentage, but it is still a substantial number.

52 points by eln1 5mo ago

intelkishan 5mo ago

How is the support for JPEG-XL across other browsers and local photo viewer applications?

eln1 5mo ago
Sure, most, see e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL#Official_software_support https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL#Official_software_supp...
- esperent 5mo ago
  > As of 2026, web browsers that support JPEG XL had 14% market share From your link.
  - throawayonthe 5mo ago
    https://caniuse.com/jpeg https://caniuse.com/jpeg huh, yeah, says 14.12%... i could have sworn it's on by default in chromium now? it worked in my browser! nevermind, i had the flag enabled previously :/ https://jpegxl.info/resources/jpeg-xl-test-page.html https://jpegxl.info/resources/jpeg-xl-test-page.html
brokenmachine 5mo ago
https://caniuse.com/?search=jpeg-xl https://caniuse.com/?search=jpeg-xl Doesn't look very good.
- eln1 5mo ago
  Waiting for enabled by default in Firefox (already in nightly 153) and Chrome (hopefully this year).

nextaccountic 5mo ago

Is there any hardware accelerated jpeg xl implementation? Like VA-API's VAProfileJPEGBaseline for jpeg

throawayonthe 5mo ago
could you tell more/point to resources about hw-accel jpegs? does it make a difference for some sort of pipeline/batch operations or 'normal' use too? are there issues with some jpeg features being unsupported? i haven't heard almost anything about this
- nextaccountic 5mo ago
  it's a throughput thing yes, or in my case it's also a desire to not hog the cpu with bulk image processing features like progressive jpegs and some color spaces aren't supported. I think it could be but it isn't and not sure why jpegs found in the wild will typically not make use of hardware acceleration or use just it for a subset of the decoding (not sure about the details). browsers didn't bother using hardware acceleration for jpegs just for the images that can be processed fine so it is meant for jpegs you control rather than jpegs you find on the web. unless you convert them yourself

jadecarter68 5mo ago

I've been testing JPEG-XL on nightly, it's a lifesaver for high-res photos. Half the size of PNG with no quality loss.

nateb2022 5mo ago
What sites already are using JPEG-XL en masse?

y2244 5mo ago

As an aside - My Firefox updated the other day and now has no sign up VPN built in with multiple countries available to choose. Very welcome feature.

ksec 5mo ago

Considering Apple's support and product cycle. You are looking at a Billion devices supporting JPEG XL between now and end of next year. It might be low in percentage, but it is still a substantial number.