6 ms·
Don't we already have WebP?
by spb 12y ago
Don't we already have WebP?
- muizelaar 12y agoFrom the article: "Mozilla did a study of various lossy compressed image formats. HEVC (hence BPG) was a clear winner by a wide margin. BPG files are actually a little smaller than raw HEVC files because the BPG header is smaller than the corresponding HEVC header." This study includes WebP.
- mda 12y agoBut he conveniently excluded webp from his comparison shots :)
- WhitneyLand 12y agoYes but webp hasn't taken off as much as some would like as a defacto standard. BPG looks good upon cursory inspection. It seems to be more efficient than WebP and supports 42-bit color. It also has .png's features of transparency and lossless compression although I didn't see anything mentioned about animation to replace .gif. Bonus: since it's based on h.265 hardware support will come naturally and should be just a software update for devices that already have HEVC capability.
- gpvos 12y agoNot having animation is a plus to me.
- espadrine 12y agoh.265 is the corresponding format for animation.
- dahjelle 12y agoNot to mention it has a JavaScript port that means it can work it browsers today.
- kzrdude 12y agoDoesn't a JavaScript implementation offset most of the performance benefits? Today we have browsers that are smart about when to cache the decoded image and when not, etc; does that have to be reimplemented in javascript?
- billconan 12y agoI have tried a dart webp decoder. it was so slow. decoding a small image (400*300) takes 300msecs.
- TD-Linux 12y agoThere is also a Javascript port of WebP decoding: http://webpjs.appspot.com/ http://webpjs.appspot.com/ As a bonus, you won't have to pay for a HEVC decoder license.
- billconan 12y agoI think webp supports transparency and lossless.
- GhotiFish 12y agoI feel like if you're going to base an image format off a compression standard made for video, that animation is probably a short way off.
- ChrisGranger 12y agoWebP is in some ways superior, in particular because it has a lossless option like PNG. [Edit: NOPE, I was mistaken.] I think it's kind of a shame that it hasn't caught on all that well. Maybe it's a fantasy, but I'd sure like to consolidate all web images into a single widely-supported and open source format. Ah, to dream...
- gpvos 12y agoSixth bullet: Lossless compression is supported.
- ChrisGranger 12y agoMissed it, my bad!
- gpvos 12y agoI didn't check the code though. I wonder if it's any good. JPEG also has a lossless mode, but no-one uses or even implements it.
- sylvinus 12y agoFrom what the website says, BGP does support lossless compression.
- beefman 12y agoI think it's nice to have separate formats for lossy and lossless compression. Makes it easy for users to tell what's going on.