3 ms·
Sorry if that was confusing, I have edited my post to clarify a bit: That sentence was about a feature specific to JPEG XL, which is that if you have JPEG files
by cbolton 13d ago
Sorry if that was confusing, I have edited my post to clarify a bit: That sentence was about a feature specific to JPEG XL, which is that if you have JPEG files you can re-encode then as JPEG XL to save space without any loss of quality. It's nice for peace of mind, you can bulk convert a large archive and you know you still have the same pixels everywhere (later you can even turn them back to JPEG without loss if you want). AVIF cannot do that. Now if you are OK with some loss in the conversion, you can also do much better than 20% with JPEG XL.
- danudey 13d agoWorth mentioning that someone else in the comments converted their large library of JPEGs to JPEG XL for exactly this reason and only realized afterwards that they lost a ton of image metadata from the EXIF tags. This probably isn't what you would assume would happen for a bulk 'lossless conversion' so if you're going to do this then make sure you're validating the metadata too (if it matters to you).
- kps 13d agoThat's probably not the case. `cjxl` preserves metadata, but early on, some popular metadata extractors (exiftool, exiv2) silently ignored it.
- Broiler9437 12d agoI have no issue with EXIF here. Compressed JPEGs were reverted with zero data lost