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 4 weeks 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 4 weeks ago
uis@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Both og JPEG and JXL support lossless compression.
wischi@programming.dev 4 weeks ago
[deleted]uis@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
Then same can be said about JPEG LS and JPEG XL. Most browsers don’t implement that.
wischi@programming.dev 4 weeks 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 4 weeks 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 4 weeks 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 4 weeks 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 4 weeks ago
Lossless JPEG would be amazing.
zerofk@lemm.ee 4 weeks ago
JPEG 2000 supports lossless mode.
Cocodapuf@lemmy.world 4 weeks 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 4 weeks 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 4 weeks ago
There is Lossless JPEG since 1993.