It’s not just like jpeg with extra channels. It’s technically far superior, supports loss less compression, and the way the decompression works would make thumbnails obsolete. It can even recompress already existing jpeg even smaller without additional generation less. It’s hard to describe what a major step this format would be without getting very technical. A lot of operating systems and software already support is but the Google chrome team is practically preventing adoption because of company politics.
Comment on Beyond RGB: A new image file format efficiently stores invisible light data
AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Spectral JPEG XL utilizes a technique used with human-visible images, a math trick called a discrete cosine transform (DCT), to make these massive files smaller […] it then applies a weighting step, dividing higher-frequency spectral coefficients by the overall brightness (the DC component), allowing less important data to be compressed more aggressively.
This all sounds like standard jpeg compression. Is it just jpeg with extra channels?
wischi@programming.dev 6 days ago
uis@lemm.ee 5 days ago
Both og JPEG and JXL support lossless compression.
wischi@programming.dev 5 days ago
[deleted]uis@lemm.ee 4 days ago
Then same can be said about JPEG LS and JPEG XL. Most browsers don’t implement that.
wischi@programming.dev 5 days ago
JPEG does not support lossless compression. There was an extension to the standard in 1993 but most de/encoders don’t implement that and it never took off. With JPEG XL you get more bang for your buck and the same visual quality will get you a smaller file. There would be no more need for thumbnails because of improved progressive decoding.
zerofk@lemm.ee 6 days ago
Kind of, but JPEG converts image data to its own internal 3 came channel colour space before applying DCT. It is not compressing the R, G and B channels of most images. So a multichannel compression is not just compressing each channel separately.
AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Yeah, jpeg converts to lab (or something similar, I think). But the dimensions are the same: one channel for lightness, and then a number of channels one less than the total number of sampled frequencies to capture the rest of the color space.
Prok@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Yeah, it compresses better too though, and jpeg XL can be configured to compress lossless, which I imagine would also work here
dohpaz42@lemmy.world 6 days ago
Lossless JPEG would be amazing.
zerofk@lemm.ee 6 days ago
JPEG 2000 supports lossless mode.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 6 days ago
In my experience, as you increase the quality level of a jpeg, the compression level drops significantly, much more than with some other formats, notably PNG. I’d be curious to see comparisons with png and gif. I wouldn’t be surprised if the new jpeg compresses better at some resolutions, but not all, or with only some kind of images.
rice@lemmy.org 6 days ago
jpeg xl has been in development from FLIF for like 15 years there are tons of comparisons all over, even live ones on youtube
uis@lemm.ee 5 days ago
There is Lossless JPEG since 1993.