🍵
WebP isn't even the best image codec out there, but it still amazes me that a 1000x1000 pixel (1 MP), truecolor (2.86 MiB) image can compress down to 16 KiB (180:1 compression) and still be not only recognizable, but largely free of defect.
I should try to do a JPEG version and compare.
@rl_dane those aren't supported by my browser, maybe due to licence fees.
JPEG-XL isn't an issue of license fees. It's an issue of GOOG/Alphabet being an arsehole. Tabernak, for reals. ;)
@rl_dane JPEG-XL is indeed open, and developped by Google.
they asshole their own project?
Didn't realize it was a Google project. I guess so!
I know there was a lot of loud complaining when Chrome deprecated it.
@rl_dane @s1r83r
It's not a Google project, it's JPEG — Joint Photographic Experts Group, the same group that's behind original JPEG and JPEG2000, it's a further development of the latter. AFAIK Google only contributed one of the algorithms used — they aren't the sole developer, nor they have complete control over it, like they have over WebP.
@rl_dane @s1r83r
It's a truly open codec having multiple implementations, unlike WebP — in case with which there is only reference one: libwebp, which most software depends on and over which Google has complete control.
That is probably why they torpedo it and push for WebP instead — AFAIK they did drop support for it in Chrome, not sure if they ever added it back.