It really is the worst image format
Copy image? Nope, here’s the link instead.
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.worldView original on lemmy.world
Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.
View original on lemmy.worldCopy image? Nope, here’s the link instead.
28 replies
webp will always be funny to me because it was made exclusively by Google to reduce lossy file size for faster HTTP transfer, but then when JPEGXL was released with better lossy compression and the ability to load graphical data progressively by quality instead of line by line bitstream, Google switched to AVIF instead and doubled down on even more lossy compression because they just want to save cloud costs and don't care about image quality.
Why are we sending someone to "Extra Hell" for making an improved image format that has better compression and is an overall improvement over all 3 of the existing formats it replaces (jpeg, png, gif)?
Shouldn't this apply to everyone who refused to adopt it, thus breaking every normal image workflow? (Same thing can be said about JXL)
I'd say the knowledge about webp's benefits is not mainstream at all, I learned about it last week from a random YouTube video. So when people download a file that isn't working as expected they don't know who to be mad at so they make memes like this.
Because they have a poor user experience with an OS and applications that have chosen not to support it properly, and blame the image format for this
I have comments about your first question, but they're mostly stupid on my end. I think the problem for most is related to your 2nd question. Google is doing it's google thing where they do a lot to force adoption with a goal of doing nothing to support it. Combine with a general distrust of Google.
Webp has shit application support. Even Google won't support it for half their workspace apps.
I having not encounters a single program that couldn't handle webp. Window, Linux and android. All browsers, all image viewers and editing software I use just works™ with it
Photoshop didn't for a surprisingly long time.
How to determine if webp is lossless? Old format easy, jpg vs. png.
As an expert in image processing:
.png supports pretty extreme compression, while a jpeg can also be lossless. The extensions tell you nothing except which family of algorithms was used to encode/compress/store them.
Webp though, webp is only used for the internet. I mean, you could use it other places, I guess.
You're an "expert in image processing" but don't understand the fundamental difference between the .jpg and .png image formats or the encoding and compression algorithms underpinning them? I find that doubtful.
.png only compresses efficiently when used as intended, which is for screenshots or other images with large areas of solid colors, where each pixel is most likely the same color value as its neighbors. In this use case, it's much more efficient than .jpg. However, .jpg is much more efficient than .png when it's used as it's intended; encoding images of the real world, like images taken with a digital camera, where each pixel has a slightly different color value than the ones next to it.
You can test this yourself by taking a picture with your phone's camera, then copying the image, converting the copy to the other file format, then comparing the file sizes. Next, repeat the process with a screenshot of a web page or a simple Paint drawing. You'll see that the camera image is smaller as a .jpg but the screenshot is smaller as a .png.
png also compresses better when you lower the color depth, the number of colors. And you forgot png has alpha which is a big deal IMO.
Nothing the other guy said contradicts this? Nor shows a lack of understanding this?
?format=jpeg
Pin that to your clipboard
literally the first thing i do when logging into lemmy via alexandrite - settings, uncheck load images as webp
... What was ever wrong about webp? As far as I know it gives slightly better compression than jpg at similar quality
The biggest issue AFAIK has been that certain OS vendors didn't allow their users to enjoy it while the internet went on to use a new tool, so they got a lot of broken images
That is your vendors fault, not webp
Skill issue
Use it with FoundryVTT all the time, its great for reducing size without losing much quality.
Where are you seeing this?
Probably to WEBM format. And I agree with that sentiment. Much smaller file size, but you can't copy them like a gif since they're treated like a movie file.
Have you never tried to copy a webp? Or have you been blessed by never having to mess with them?
I mess with webp every day, its great for compressing because it keeps great picture quality
Are you telling me when you look at this image: https://lemmy.world/post/49219082
You can't copy it?
You can, but you can’t paste it into certain apps as it isn’t recognized, or attempting to will paste the URL instead in others and load it like a shared link.
Which is a failing of those apps if they don’t accept a widely-used format that’s existed for 16 years now, is it not? Why blame the format for that?
Webp is ass. Kinda weird since its sibling, webm, is goated for supporting transparency.
... as opposed to webp, which also supports transparency?
I mean in terms of video containers, webm is a video container made by the same or adjacent team that made webp. The only other video container I've seen that supports transparency is HEVC, which only works in safari.
Transparency is the only reason I'd ever use webm, just to clarify.
If we're talking in terms of vodeo containers (or codecs), then why are we talking about it on a post about webp?
Unless you consider webp to be a video container because it does support animated pictures, but, again, it also supports transparency.
Also, HEVC is not a video (/media) container, it's a codec.