this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
101 points (100.0% liked)

Chapotraphouse

14448 readers
616 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

party-sicko

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ashinadash@hexbear.net 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Good lord just look at that compression i-cant signature, everybody


Remember to enable JPEG-XL support in your browser, even on your phone!

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 5 points 23 hours ago (2 children)
[–] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 3 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

honestly i'm really skeptical of all these video compression algorithms trying to be image compression algorithms. maybe i shouldn't be talking because mao quote but the image algorithm designers never had the advantage of deltas between frames. i assume there's some patent thing stopping apple from using jpeg-xl instead of heif (which is avif but for hevc instead of av1) but since i can't find any benchmarks i'm just speculating there. but it's all speculation since i don't really understand compression all that well.

EDIT: found a paper by google suggesting heif and jpeg-xl have similar perception scores with jpeg-xl giving a slightly lower size. however, dark spots may have slightly worse perception with jpeg-xl.

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 2 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Kinda makes sense that storing image would be a subset of storing videos.

[–] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

it makes sense yeah but most of the space savings is from keeping one frame and then saving the next several frames as a series of just deltas. plus there's stuff you notice when it's moving but not so much when it's still. between that and the jpeg-xl benchmarks i'm comfortable speculating that there's probably maybe something to the idea of having separate lossy image and video codecs.

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 2 points 3 hours ago* (last edited 3 hours ago) (1 children)

You are still storing a key frame every couple of seconds or so

[–] into_highest_invite@lemmygrad.ml 2 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

you're right but even then i kinda think there are different things to optimize for. i found a benchmark i edited into my original post but honestly who the hell knows

[–] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 2 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

To me it's honestly a lot of it's the same picture

And the results in data compression aren't different enough to use anything with less wide software support.

[–] ashinadash@hexbear.net 10 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

Ask jpegxl.info, AVIF performs better in some ultra-low-filesize/bitrate scenarions but JPEGXL is better in most other areas and supports progressive loading which is useful for internet purposes. Plus you can losslessly transcode old JPEGs.

Personally I want to use lossy compression when I want to avoid a 35mb PNG, and AVIF just did not do as well as JXL with bringing the various massive PNGs down to size.


Remember to enable JPEG-XL support in your browser, even on your phone!

[–] segfault11@hexbear.net 23 points 23 hours ago (1 children)
[–] ashinadash@hexbear.net 10 points 23 hours ago* (last edited 23 hours ago) (1 children)

Bwaaa Y'all best get informed


Remember to enable JPEG-XL support in your browser, even on your phone!

[–] Johnny_Arson@hexbear.net 3 points 18 hours ago

ashinadash: I sell PNG and PNG accessories.