• @redisdead
    link
    English
    -671 month ago

    The issue with jpegxl is that in reality jpeg is fine for 99% of images on the internet.

    If you need lossless, you can have PNG.

    “But JPEGXL can save 0,18mb in compression!” Shut up nerd everyone has broadband it doesn’t matter

    • @TheGrandNagus
      link
      English
      56
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      What a dumb comment.

      All of that adds up when you have thousands or tens of thousands of images. Or even when you’re just loading a very media-heavy website.

      The compression used by JPEG-XL is very, very good. As is the decoding/encoding performance, both in single core and in multi-core applications.

      It’s royalty free. Supports animation. Supports transparency. Supports layers. Supports HDR. Supports a bit depth of 32 compared to, what, 8?

      JPEG-XL is what we should be striving for.

        • @TheGrandNagus
          link
          English
          26
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          shut up nerd

          He said, on Lemmy. On the Technology community. On a submission about image formats.

          If nerdiness, or discussion about image formats or other tech bothers you, why are you even here?

          Moving on from that…

          There’s storage improvements. There’s server side considerations for storage, processing, and energy efficiency. There’s poor mobile data connections to contend with.

          There’s better compression (I’m guessing you don’t like artefacts all over images, or other oddities stemming from bad compression?)

          There’s still HDR support. There’s still the support for animations. There’s still support for transparency. There’s still support for layers.

          Imagine being upset about the prospect of their being a vastly better image standard. Are you that desperate to be contrarian? Are you that desperate for attention?

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            31 month ago

            You are totally right AND He’s making a valid point with his sarcastic joke of “shut up, nerd!”

            “Nobody cares” means companies dont want to spend money to incorporate it if there’s no demand from consumers.

            Most consumers have no idea what a jpeg even is.

            It won’t be until Apple or someone brands it as an iPeg and claims you have a smol pp if your device doesn’t have it that folks will notice.

            Im reminded of telling folks about shoutcasts and nobody cared. Then apple comes out with podcasts and everyone was suddenly excited about 8 year old streaming tech

            • @FooBarrington
              link
              English
              11 month ago

              Yet for some reason, browsers started supporting other formats like WebP, even though even fewer consumers wanted them. This makes complete sense when looking at it from the perspective “the companies try to save money and increase market share without caring about the consumer”. How do you explain it from yours?

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                11 month ago

                Excellent point on the webp.

                I’m guessing that being google’s baby they integrated it into chromium

          • @redisdead
            link
            English
            -29
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            He said, on Lemmy. On the Technology community. On a submission about image formats.

            I know my audience.

            I’m not upset there’s a new better stronger faster harder standard, I’m just telling you why nobody cares about your jpeg2000 v2

            • @TheGrandNagus
              link
              English
              15
              edit-2
              1 month ago

              Whatever you say. After all, you must be right. You’re a contrarian on the internet. You’re quirky and different. You’re not like the other girls.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      501 month ago

      That 0.18mb accumulates quickly on the server’s side if you have 10000 people trying to access that image at the same time. And there are millions it not billions of images on the net. Just because we have the resources doesn’t mean we should squander them…that’s how you end up with chat apps taking multiple gigabytes of RAM.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 month ago

      “I’m very small minded and am not important or smart enough to have ever worked on a large-scale project in my life, but I will assume my lack of experience has earned me a sense of authority” -Redisdead

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      8
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      While AVIF saves about 2/3 in my manga downloads (usually jpg). 10 GB to 3 GB. Btw, most comicbook apps support avif.

      • @redisdead
        link
        English
        -401 month ago

        10 whole GB of storage? I understand now why you need such an ultimate compression technology, this is an insurmountable amount of data in these harrowing times where you can buy a flash card the size of a fingernail that can hold that amount about 25 times.

    • @AdrianTheFrog
      link
      English
      51 month ago

      Check how large your photos library is on your computer. Now wouldn’t it be nice if it was 40% smaller?

      • @redisdead
        link
        English
        -11 month ago

        I have several TBs of storage. I don’t remember the last time I paid attention to it.

        I don’t even use jpeg for it. I have all the raw pics from my DSLR and lossless PNGs for stuff I edited.

        It’s quite literally a non issue. Storage is cheap af.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      -1
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      It’s competing with webp and it helps prevent jpg artifacts when downloaded multiple times

      • @redisdead
        link
        English
        11 month ago

        prevent jpg artifacts when downloaded multiple times

        That’s not how downloading works

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 month ago

          Slightly higher in this thread you spout off complaining about pedantry, and here you are, being even more pedantic?

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -2
          edit-2
          1 month ago

          If you download and upload repeatedly you potentially lose some data each time which is how we got jpeg memes

          • @nutsack
            link
            English
            15
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            that happens when the sites you upload it to re-encode the image