I hate webp image files. Why? Why did you do this to us? Leave PNGs and JPGs alone, wtf is Webp?? who the frick cares about this image format? God I fricking HATE WEBPs so much I hope they disappear. I just want to download funny memes and transparent PNG emojis, when you think you've finally found your perfect image, you try to download it, and then you realize, IT'S A FRICKING WEBP
WHAT THE ACTUAL FRICK
WHY JUST WHY? Which low IQ moron's bright idea was it to just ruin something that already worked WELL and turn it into a serious inconvenience?
FRICK WEBP
What's exactly wrong with WebP?
No hardware acceleration. Most of the internet traffic caters to phoneBlack folk and ARM while power efficient is incredibly dogshit at cpu intensive tasks so it needs to hardware accelerate everything.
takes literally nothing to decode on an arm cpu, shut the frick up daiz please
>cpu intensive tasks
because decoding a 1000px vp8 keyframe is so cpu intensive...
You're assuming everyone has an iphone 15 prolapse max. A53 SoCs haven't been banned yet, I'm not even sure what "consumer protection laws" even do anymore.
The point is no hardware acceleration leads to lag and more importantly shitty battery life in those shitty phones. If you look up android 14 requirenemnts you'll notice that all brand new phones must have avif hardware image decoding so it seems like we can finally escape JPG for good.
???
the images you are replying to are literally from 2017
it's just as power efficient as jpeg, period, the type of processor doesn't change that.
>The point is no hardware acceleration leads to lag
why would it if it takes less time to decode? moron
>If you look up android 14 requirenemnts you'll notice that all brand new phones must have avif hardware image decoding so it seems like we can finally escape JPG for good.
if you look up "pixDAIZ" in the archives you'll notice that everyone wants you to have a nice day, it seems like we can finally escape your moronation for good
How much energy does it really take for a phone to decode a single static frame?
barely any, this is a non issue
>actually more energy efficient than jpeg
wtf i love webp now
No one cares about this you moronic Black person, the only reason is that nobody uses it
IF it wasn't a big deal then avif hw accel would have never been added to android 14. Ultumately it's a huge testament to how much of a disaster ARM has been. We got good battery life but if fricked everything else up.
well, we can use the same fricking logic for webp
if it is a big deal, then why is webp hardware accel not a thing? every phone has a vp8 decoder already
>Ultumately it's a huge testament to how much of a disaster ARM has been
???? jesus christ your moronation keeps getting worse and worse
yeah right, arm has been a disaster, a huge failure... only like most devices on earth use it... dammn such a piece of shit architecture, good thing we are all using x86 smartphones nowdays...
>We got good battery life but if fricked everything else up.
you still haven't proven how/why arm cpus would struggle with modern image codecs but other architectures are fine with it
we keep posting graph that prove webp/avif barely any harder to decode for arm cpus compared to jpeg/png but you never reply in a meaningful way
Think about it, x86 can decode whatever meme image format at 9001 MP/s. It doesn't need the hardware acceleration crutch.
>"Yes goy use this gimped piece of shit CPU for everything even though it's going to create computers with soldered RAM/SSDs!"
They played everyone for fools with MUH BATTERY LIFE!
>Think about it, x86 can decode whatever meme image format at 9001 MP/s. It doesn't need the hardware acceleration crutch.
...the same can be said about arm cpus, your point?
you still haven't explained or shown any data that shows arm having issues decoding stuff
>"Yes goy use this gimped piece of shit CPU for everything even though it's going to create computers with soldered RAM/SSDs!"
...why can't we have both?
I don't want an upgradable smartphone that has 1 hour of battery life, again, what's your fricking point?
also when intel did make x86 cpus for phones those had soldered shit also, there's no benefit in x86 for phones
you really don't seem to understand the concept of right tool for the right job
every image must be avif
every device has to be x86
how about you learn to appreciate that some suff is better fit for some jobs?
we are literally discussing "arm on phones bad" here, these are whole new levels of moronation
That's the point, it can't because ARM is shit at anything cpu intensive. What other explanation do you have for hw accel being added for avif in android 14?
It kind of seems silly to add this if asiaticbench is to be trusted that the latest iTurd = i9 desktop PC.
>What other explanation do you have for hw accel being added for avif in android 14?
...that it's better to have it?
that doesn't mean you NEED it, which is what you insist on
again
ANSWER THE FRICKING QUESTION ALREADY
>if it is a big deal, then why is webp hardware accel not a thing? every phone has a vp8 decoder already
>if it is a big deal, then why is webp hardware accel not a thing? every phone has a vp8 decoder already
answer the fricking question already butthole
It's obvious because webp is google's pet project that everyone universily hates. Which phones save screenshots/camera images to webp by default?
??? that doesn't answer the question at all
>Which phones save screenshots/camera images to webp by default?
which phone saves screenshots/camera images as avif?
If android saved to AVIF by default for screenshots and camera images then this whole image format war woud finally be over at least for the next decade or so.
Fingers crossed I guess.
never gonna happen luckily lol
and also
>avif for screenshots
...what would be the point? avif sucks ass at lossless compression, it's not any better than png at it, what would be the fricking point?
Because lossy avif is visually lossless. For 90% of use-cases there's no reason to use lossless anymore.
>For 90% of use-cases there's no reason to use lossless anymore.
except screenshots are that 10% of cases where it makes sense to use lossless, this again goes to show how ignorant you are on the matter
png has always been the default for screenshots because
1. in most cases, screenshots are made up of simple shapes, which are very efficient to compress with lossless compression
2. visually lossless becomes much more difficult to achieve with small text and icons, which is the content of most screenshots
3. mmhhhh yeah i'd like to be able to send those screenshots to people, i think that's kinda the point of making screenshots, thanks.
Most people aren't going to care about 10% better screenshot quality at 800% zoom if the lossy AVIF is 88KB while the lossless AVIF is 9001KB. You're adding unnecessary bloat.
No one is talking about quality. Steam has a lossless options and that's either PNG (RGBA64 is less dense than lossless 10-BPC AVIF; also, HDR PNG support is a bit iffy) or AVIF. Lossy screenshots are just JPEG, of course.
That's why lossy avif is serious buisness, it's able to achieve visually lossless quality at ridiculously low file sizes like 88KB. JPG couldn't do that which is why we invented PNG, WHICH became a joke as people started saving JPG images as PNG or used lossy compression (ie reduced colors + dithering).
It's like lossless is aids to the internet or something.
>88 kb visually lossless 1080p screenshot
yeah sure...
except, the average png screenshot is barely any bigger than that lol
bullshit I have a few hundred PNG screenshots and most are more than 1MB so I can't even send them over a text. I have to convert them to JPG first...
lossy AVIF screenshots literally can't come soon enough to android.
>1 mb png screenshot is equal visual quality as 88 kb avif one
yeah sure
Nice trips but yeah that's the whole reason people are interested in it. It does really really well at crazy low file sizes.
When you think about it that actually both decreases bandwidth expenses and improves image quality on the internet at the same time.
>When you think about it that actually both decreases bandwidth expenses and improves image quality on the internet at the same time.
...we are talking about local screenshots here, moron.
screenshots which most apps will either transcode to jpeg or straight up say "format not supported kys Black person"
Gee, it would sure be amazing if AVIF got hardware acceleration and screenshots were saved to lossy AVIF at the OS level...
...that has literally nothing to do with the post you are replying to
this is like the 100th time you did this
why
They troonys code to JPEG because avif isn't hardware accelerated yet.
2 more weeks
no that's not the reason
and that's not what we were talking about
in 2 more weeks hopefully you kys
"Android welcomes dav1d, the best AV1 software decoder. It's official! All Android devices back to Android S received this new codec over the air. Most devices can decode 720p30 in software using dav1d. Apps need to opt into dav1d to benefit for now yet soon it will become the default av1 software decoder."
FRICK, DAIZ WON
>what would be the point?
AVIF is the best option for lossless (JPEG can do lossy) HDR screenshots on systems where JXL is not available. For example, Steam can use it for HDR games as the uncompressed screenshot option.
>AVIF is the best option for lossless
jesus christ, are you even reading???
AVIF SUCKS AT LOSSLESS, EVERYBODY KNOWS IT, WEBP IS LITERALLY WAY BETTER AT IT
Try reading my entire post.
>PNG
Only supports RGBA64 (16-BPC RGBA) for >8 BPC, with rather poor compression density. (Optimized) 8-BPC PNG usually beats lossless AVIF, but that may not be the case with fast encodes of HDR data. Also, viewers handle HDR metadata in PNG inconsistnetly.
>WebP
Cannot do >8 BPC.
Note that I'm not talking about a theoretical scenario. Steam, the actual application, supports AVIF specifically for lossless HDR screenshots.
what the frick are you talking about Black person? who cares about hardware acceleration for images? are you using a Nokia from 25 years ago?
The guy that's obsessed with AVIF is also obsessed with hardware acceleration and SIMD instructions.
He kind of has a point though, see heic on iPhones. There's absolutely no way in hell a phone is going to have enough compute horsepower to capure and decode a 48MP HEVC keyframe in less than 1 second. Most phones today are only realistically on par with core2duo, maybe core2quad.
https://9to5mac.com/2023/09/12/iphone-14-pro-heif-max-camera/
iPhone HEIC is a grid of 512x512 images. A 48MP photo is 16x12 of these images, if you round up. A phone can very much decode 8 seconds worth of less-than-480p HEVC video in less than a second on a CPU, regardless of how much you're obsessed with it "just feeling" like it can't.
Regardless, iPhone uses hardware encoding/decoding for this in the camera and gallery apps, which is why it only uses fixed parameters (chroma subsampling, bit depth, grid tile resolution) so it can basically do the equivalent of decoding a video clip when decoding an image.
This would not be doable on an image with arbitrary parameters and there are next to no phone video decoders that would be capable of decoding a single image of that resolution that isn't using grid derivation. This only works on its closed ecosystem where they both encode and decode the images.
Or maybe you could just use an image codec to store images, giving you space, quality, and time improvements without needing to think about hardware decoding.
Yes let's ignore the trillions of keyframes in videos that can also function as images...
>No hardware acceleration
Is there even an image format that is typically decoded using hardware acceleration today?
see
People in this thread are just brainwashed by asiaticbench. A quick GTA benchmark quickly reveals just how legitimately powerful these ARM CPUs really are.
that it's barely any better than a properly encoded jpeg (see mozjpg) at lossy compression
and while it's great at lossless compression (often 2x more efficient than png), no website ever uses it for that
I'm all for new image formats, most compatibility gays are just using software from 1990, but webp is fricking useless
maybe it would've been good if it was based on vp9 and not vp8 which is the shittiest codec known to man... or maybe if it was actually an image codec instead of a troonyfied video codec...
>that it's barely any better than a properly encoded jpeg (see mozjpg) at lossy compression
JPEGs don't support transparency though.
see
I challenge you to find a scenario where that's required/useful
saying "webp is actually good because of this thing that nobody has ever used" is so fricking moronic
that's not the reason the codec was born and it's not the reason webshitters are using it
This 4K transparent cube. It's 30MB as a PNG but less than 3MB as a WebP.
https://files.catbox.moe/yrpe7w.webp
this shit again daiz???
the shitty noisy 4k transparent cube is literally a demo image you or somebody else made as a best case scenario to show off what webp can do
it doesn't address ANYTHING of what I said
are there such images on the web? no, never seen one, how can you be so fricking moronic
>(often 2x more efficient than png
eeh it's more like 1.3x better if you use a decent png encoder while not being any slower to encode.
https://files.catbox.moe/j4c7nd.png (7.4MB)
https://files.catbox.moe/khi8is.webp (5.5MB)
https://files.catbox.moe/scirkz.jxl (4.4MB)
Not supported here therefore it's shit
That's not Google's fault. Literally no one is stopping Hiromoot from adding support.
It doesn't have hardware acceleration, satan. Avif could chabge things butthere's only like 12 android 14 phones right now.
hardware acceleration doesn't matter and isn't required, pixdaiz
>Avif could chabge things butthere's only like 12 android 14 phones right now.
oh so updating a pixel 5 from android 13 to android 14 adds avif hardware acceleration magically, yeah that's how that works i'm sure it is
except avif in software is already more efficient than jpeg but yeah whatever daiz, stay moronic
This isn't measuring the energy required to decode the image. It's measuring the energy required to receive the image over a network, based on images with the same "perceived quality" as measured in a pretty questionable way. AVIF isn't the lowest because it's cheap to decode, it's the smallest because the image used in this test had the smallest file size, and thus took less energy to receive over the network.
Do you want to know why pixDAIZ is obsessed with hardware acceleration? It's because he's obsessed with AV1. As a video codec, AV1 needs hardware acceleration, so it was designed with the expectation that hardware acceleration would be present whenever it's used. But hardware acceleration for images is an awful idea, and as a result, the AV1 image format AVIF is an awful idea. In the absence of hardware acceleration, it will almost always come last in terms of decoding performance.
This guy wants AVIF to be infallible. He obsesses over hardware decoding out of delusions that it would cover up one of AVIF's most obvious, objective, measurable weak points.
no sovl
it’s the “you vil live in ze pod” of image formats
They'll tell a lot of moronic reasons but the only real one is than nobody uses it. Nobody
IQfy doesn't support it
IQfy also doesn't support AV1 and AVIF despite them having universal decoding support across current-gen hardware and operating systems. All current-gen GPUs from Nvidia, AMD and Intel support hardware encoding for AV1, which is something that never really happened for VP9. There's literally no reason for IQfy not to support them now.
phonegays apparently need hw support for their toy CPUs. I just tried decoding some high-res images on an old samung phone and it crashed LMAO.
>his filepicker doesn't automatically convert webp to a compatible format for him
basically /this - as soon as I can upload webps I'll happily save them in muh maymay folders.
everybodys singular anger with them is because double clicking them in windows opens it in mspaint , nobody will admit it
Nothing supports it. I found a funny instance of this earlier: Google, who created webp to begin with, don't let you upload webp files to Google Translate. Even Google doesn't support their own stupid format!
Realistically, most morons here are just angry they can't use it in this shithole
>basically /this - as soon as I can upload webps I'll happily save them in muh maymay folders.
We're all waiting for avif hardware decoding to becone a widespread thing. Had google not fricked shit up so badly they would have included hardware acceleration for webp so more software adoption would have existed.
PNGs can't use lossy compression and JPGs don't support transparency.
Lossy compression should not exist. Just use PNG for everything.
PNGs are inefficient for high-res photos.
This moron probably thinks all websites can afford Tbps of hosting bandwidth.
>I just want to download funny memes and transparent PNG emojis, when you think you've finally found your perfect image, you try to download it, and then you realize, IT'S A FRICKING WEBP
You can still download them, you know. There's nothing stopping you from downloading them.
you can't download transparent animated JPEGs
except no website has ever used webp like this
yes, webp can do lossy transparent animated images... have you ever seen one? i didn't
What about AVIF?
total pixDAIZ death
I hate israelites
i'm trans btw not sure if that matters
...i literally already answered all of that
and you just keep repeating the same shit replying to the first posts I made
what the frick is your problem even? you can't read or something?
>avif hardware decoding on android 14 is mandatory
no it's not jackass
it's mandatory for certification of new devices, that doesn't fricking apply to already existing phones
>it's mandatory for certification of new devices
It's not, actually. See the reply chain starting at
. The AVIF troll knows this and intentionally keeps spreading the disinformation regardless while ignoring anything contradicting them, so I just don't bother interacting with them any more.
>so I just don't bother interacting with them any more.
that's pretty difficult when every single time you attempt to discuss codecs every post you make gets sperged on by that butthole
It's so fricking annoying, you could be talking about anything with another anon and this fricking Black personmonkey chimes in with 50 different replies talking about MUUUH HARDWARE ACCELERATION MUUH IPROLAPSE 15 PRO MUUH ANDROID 14 MUUH A53 VERY BAD!! CANT DO ANYTHING !! SHULD BE ILLEGAL
>that's pretty difficult when every single time you attempt to discuss codecs every post you make gets sperged on by that butthole
Yes, I don't even post in most of these threads unless there's something new or at least something that looks like a genuine discussion in them. There's no point when it's just the same noise.
I doubt that this was their actual goal because there are better way to achieve it, but they have successfully killed off image format threads on IQfy.
>image formats bread
sperged by pixDAIZ
>video formats bread
sperged by mpeg-la shills claiming h266 won and av1 is btfo'd
>audio codecs bread
sperged by audiophools and "muh storage is cheap" Black folk
you're right. let's all use flac, avid and h266. it's more convenient at this point
>removes trip
>keeps mentioning the same things over and over that nobody ever talks about (example: a53)
what's even the point of removing your trip then? every single thing you type out is the exact same as when you had your trip in place, everyone knows it's you lol
It honestly wouldn't have been that bad if google had added hw accel for it. The ultimate goal is to replace obsolete jpeg which has been fricking up image quality on the internet since forever. AVIF seems to be the first honest attempt at solving this problem though.
I'n sorry if I sound like a parrot buy we've dozens of modern image formats that have tried to replace jpeg and they all have 1 thing in common: no hw accel.
>I'm sorry if I sound like a parrot
parrots are more knowledgeable about codecs than you are kys
>they all have 1 thing in common: no hw accel.
...which they also have in common with jpeg, png, and every other image codec, but yes I'm sure that's the reason, and it's not like compatibility is a bigger problem and that might have something to do with it... nah i'm sure if you ask a normie "why don't you use avif" their answer is "no hardware decode"
actually I should take the other anon's advice and stop replying, it's not like you can read... or have a working brain...
PNG is king, webp is proprietary google pajeet slop, not needed when bandwidth and storage is cheap as frick
simple as
>storage is cheap as frick
so do you take 50 mb 12 mpx pngs with your 128 gb phone?
>bandwidth is cheap as frick
no, bandwidth is very expensive and the main reason webp/vp9/av1 exists, moron
>bandwidth is very expensive
what's it like living in a 3rd world country?
It's not a (You) problem, it's a webhost problem. On average, websites can only afford to send you content at 8-24 Mbps with places like the website you're on dipping below 8 Mbps when traffic is high. This is a tough balancing act because you also want things to load in a few seconds at most else your visitor goes somewhere else.
This is completely ignoring data caps.
???
bandwidth is very expensive all over the world, you are just a clueless moron
see
if that wasn't the case, why did google make vp9, start AOM, and transcode millions of videos on youtube to such modern formats? you must be braindead
What? Bandwidth is actually cheaper in 3rd world countries
nta but source?
>bandwidth and storage cheap as frick, not an issue
>uses lossless compression codec
just like audiophools that say storage space is now pretty much unlimited but still use flac instead of pcm wav
if you aren't concerned about storage at all... why not use bmp?
>PNG is king
Maybe when encoded using PNGquant or similar.
here is my moronic question...
why the frick do you need hardware acceleration to view a fricking image? what the frick are these morons talking about?
webp is just another stupid image format and your just mad because hiroshima moot wont add it to this shithole
>what the frick are these morons talking about?
you mean... what the frick is pixdaiz talking about?
it's always the same moron, everyone else is saying hardware decode is not required
In short: phone cpus = weak pieces of shit. You know how asiaticbebch tells people the latesr iTurd = i9 desktop PC? It's fake news.
are you telling me phone are struggling to display a webp image??
why is google pushing it hard then when 50% of their traffic is from phones then?
>are you telling me phone are struggling to display a webp image??
They aren't, the pedantic 12yo autists ITT don't understand that nobody cares if an image takes an extra 10ms to render and that the only reason webp is hated is because nobody uses it
>ffmpeg -I input.webp output.png
Wow, that was hard
yeah let me just install ffmpeg on windows, set its path on system variables, fire up cmd, change to the specific path, run a command with parameters,etc every time I download an image
Freetards are subhuman as hell
why would you download and configure it more than once?
It's obvious that you only install / configure once and even so it's stupidly tedious
nice try but i will not believe that anybody on IQfy is using windows without wsl or at least cygwin
>install scoop
>scoop install ffmpeg
wow that was hard
>install this freetard managed greasy repo / package manager that might get your system infected if one of the thousand maintainers slips up or acts maliciously
Lmao
why are you laughing about it? seems like a serious issue to me.
it's funny because 1) I don't run package managers, if we can even call them that 2) anyone who runs these deserves that fate
Ah yes, it's much safer to install random software directly from first-party distributors with no oversight, ideally requiring the installer to run as root.
or you could just use paint moron
>set its path on system variables,
>change to the specific path,
I don't think you understand how setting $PATH works.
>install ffmpeg on windows, set its path on system variables
everyone should do this anyway
>run a command with parameters
make bat files with the settings you like
>fire up cmd, change to the specific path
if you hold shift while right clicking in explorer you get the option of opening cmd in whatever directory you're in.
so for example if I wanted to convert a folder of images to avif all I have to do is shift+right click in the folder, open cmd, and then type 'avif' and hit enter
homie? just go to the same directory the ffmpeg executable is in.
Converting lossy to png is Black personlicious.
>who the frick cares about this image format?
You
Just use Chance.
buy an ad
Lossless webp is smaller than png
>WHY JUST WHY? Which low IQ moron's bright idea was it to just ruin something that already worked WELL and turn it into a serious inconvenience?
JPEG, PNG and GIF all have their own limitations that are rectified by newer generation image formats like AVIF, JPEG XL and WebP. JPEG not having transparency support is a significant one.
>JPEG not having transparency support is a significant one.
use png
PNG's lossless-only compression can result in much larger file sizes than WebP.
There was a high-res transparent image I wanted to upload to IQfy but I couldn't because it exceeded the 3MB limit and there wasn't much I could do about it other than converting to JPG and losing transparency.
Converting it to AVIF, JXL and WebP all allowed the image to be under the limit without downscaling the resolution or discarding the transparency, if only IQfy would allow it to be uploaded.
what about lowering bit depth, adding dithering, and optimizing with oxipng?
you'd lose some quality but I'm pretty sure it would work unless by high res you mean some 8k shit
>if only IQfy would allow it to be uploaded.
So all this debate was for nothing huh?
Just use fricking catbox lol
I think you and the point missed each other
>rest of the world: serves you images as webp, some even saved on cdn as webp
>4chinz: only allows you to upload jpg or png
It's much better than a patent-encumbed format with royalties like HEIC (HEVC-based images) becoming the established successor to JPEG, can you imagine what the web would have looked like if that format had won?