JPEG XL

276 readers

1 users here now

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

bitflag@lemmy.world

JPEG[XL] is Dying - And that's a bad thing (www.youtube.com)

submitted 11 months ago by morrowind@lemmy.ml to c/jpegxl@lemmy.world

7 comments fedilink hide all child comments

all 8 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[–] Ephera@lemmy.ml 12 points 11 months ago

Man, fuck this whole Google monopoly.

[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 3 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Weird, I just saw that video popup in my YouTube feed and now here it is in my Lemmy feed.

[–] daggermoon@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago

I was unaware of JPEG-XL until I saw that video. Now I need this to become a standard. I figured out how to enable support in Librewolf, it's buggy but it mostly works. JPEG-XL is my new favorite image format.

[+] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de -14 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

Just saw that this is a community dedicated to this, but still i feel a need to tell you: jpeg-xl is kinda shit and does not need saving. Its vastly inferior to avif for all practical online use cases and all the issues with avif will be resolved sooner rather than later.

All the minor and major internet data transmitters have an interest in making avif better and its already used all over the place anyways. It works with every common browser, image viewer and editor already so the complaints from the video are really odd.

[–] Zarxrax@lemmy.world 15 points 11 months ago

What aspect of jpegxl do you think is inferior to avif? (You said jpeg, but I assume you meant jpegxl)

[–] Jake_Farm@sopuli.xyz 11 points 11 months ago

Did you even watch the video or are you commenting solely based on the title?

[–] BakedCatboy@lemmy.ml 11 points 11 months ago

Doesn't the video basically prove the opposite? That aside from a study sponsored by avif and Google that is likely biased, in practical use cases jpxl actually comes out ahead in almost every metric and is also not proprietary?