Google's WebP - Lemmings.world

Lemmy

I’m working on a project which generates images in multiples sizes, and also converts to WEBP and AVIF.

The difference in file size is significant. It might not matter to you, but it matters to a lot of people.

Here’s an example (the filename is the width):

Also, using the <picture></picture> element, if the users’ browsers don’t support (or block) AVIF/WEBP, the original format is used. No harm in using them.

(I know this is a meme post, but some people are taking it seriously)

Is the quality the same? If so how do you know? I mean it’s better, I’m just curious.

Tldr: as we deal with a problem long enough we find more effective ways of dealing with it

jpegxl.info

Has some info on what it does

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL

Technically details might be more what you are looking for

jpegxl.info/resources/jpeg-xl-test-page

And a test page, if you don’t see jxl images then you should look at updating your browser

JPEG XL: Superior Image Compression

Explore JPEG XL, the next-generation image format delivering superior compression, fast encoding/decoding, and seamless JPEG transcoding. The future of image compression is here.

There are no browsers with jxl support and won’t be for many years to come.
Google's WebP - Lemmy.ca

Lemmy

Again - no browsers support jxl. Firefox “support” is only basic rendering of a few basic features. It’s not just browsers, there is literally no software which fully supports jxl. And won’t be for a long time.