Google announces Jpegli their new jpeg replacement its partially based on JpegXL but with a number of modifications and improvements.
It's over for jpegXL
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Google-Jpegli-Library
https://opensource.googleblog.com/2024/04/introducing-jpegli-new-jpeg-coding-library.html
https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/tree/main/lib/jpegli
jpegli doesn't compete with JXL, since the latter is strictly better. It just makes lossy WebP obsolete and competes with AVIF.
> It just makes lossy WebP obsolete
It does not.
Notice that it lacks libsharpyuv colour subsampling features and thus WebP-to-PNG-to-JPEG process yields somewhat better results.
Source: https://twitter.com/FidonetRunes/status/1736710343194243086
>compression
Considering how bad WEBP images look I don't know why I should give a frick.
Google only cares about compression because it saves THEM money when they scrape the web.
Use JPEG to make Google's servers burn.
>first web pee
>now jpegli (which sounds like some pajeet's name or maybe j peg lee, peg lee, is lee a submissive beta cuck simp homosexual maggot male?)
what is google thinking
webp has barely started working on wangblows, linux and phones
and they're already coming up with new shit like jpeggly?
They just straight up raped jpegXL's still warm corpse and now they are just mocking them.
>We made jpegXL but better
Its ”better" because it has higher compression, not higher image quality.
You dumb fricks. This is literally part of the JPEG XL project. It's just a JPEG encoder with the stuff from XL that they were able to make compliant with the original JPEG.
>It's over for jpegXL
Does this '"Jpegli" support alpha transparency?
It appears to be a fork of jpegXL
They straight up copied the features list from the jpegXL github
Pic related is jpegli
This is jpegXL
Look at the repository name.
No, it's just a better JPEG1 encoder/decoder. The only real new feature is >8 bits per channel support. It's in no way better than JXL, other than existing software support and encode/decode speed.
>8 bits per channel support.
is this the only thing this has over the mozjpeg encoder?
No, it also encodes and decodes better in general (much like mozjpeg encodes better than libwebp-turbo) and supports XYB via ICC.
all this means is that jpg gets to keep on living for a bit longer which is good given the significantly better results
>please always execute our exploitable piece of code
mmm, kinda weird that this comes out right after the xz fiasco. israel must be trying to recoup from the loss fast.
>some unsafe code was just discovered
>no one should ever write code anymore
>google researchers working on jxl announce a legacy jpeg encoder with improvements from jxl that lives in jxl's repo
jxlsisters it's so over
>we've created a new standard!
>now there is 25 standards!
It has a different use case than the other formats
Don't know why they don't use the fricking general tho
>Don't know why they don't use the fricking general tho
Because someone who has decided that they hate JXL for no good reason is going on a disinformation rampage now that IP count is gone. Thread is completely useless and topic undiscussable.
It's a false flag psyop of some JXL schizo to make people hate AVIF. Creating 5 different threads about the same topic doesn't solve that problem either. He will come here and do the same anyway.
No, it has nothing to do with either format. It doesn't matter which one they pretend is perfect and which one they keep posting FUD about, in the end, their goal is to prevent any coherent discussion about image formats on this site. You can see how they're also trying to get people to post in their shitpost thread by linking it in any threads with actual discussion, such as this one.
There is the same amount of shitposting in both threads
I didn't use the "general" because that thread exists for arguing with the keyframes obsessed autist not discussing image formats
Name is too gay, will not use.
>google
dogshit
>35% improvement over jpeg
regular old as frick jpeg or jpegXL?
35% improvement over jpeg with an algorithm that is backwards compatible to jpeg and runs on existing hardware encoders/decoders
so it's shit then
>compression
There's no use case for this at all just buy more ram and hard drives.
It's also higher quality. More bits means smoother gradients.
how does this compare to guetzli?
also, anybody has a .exe compiled for winblows? I'm a moron, thanks.
Download latest jxl-x64-windows-static.zip. It includes jpegli binaries.
thanks
did some testing, and it looks like a smeared shit version of mozjpg so far
Try setting distance to 0.5 or quality to 95. CLI help lies and the default -d 1.0 is tuned to be "good enough" instead of truly visually lossless.
https://cloudinary.com/blog/jpeg-xl-and-the-pareto-front#what_quality_points_
They announced it only now, but jpegli have been in jxl's repo for a while. Just grab the latest release.
What's the binary called? cjpeg?
That's the encoder, yes.
From where? There's no new release
Holy shit did none of the morons here read the article, this is not a new format lmao
welcome to IQfy, everyone is moronic, first time visitor?
>psychovisually effective computations
the what now