• aliser@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 hours ago

    it supports transparency and produces small file sizes compared to PNG while looking pretty similarly. fuck Microsoft in particular for not supporting it.

  • Awkwardparticle@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 hours ago

    Webp’s purpose is to display images on web pages in a format that allows fast loading and rendering. When a user downloads or views an image it should be served in a better format. Webp serves it’s purpose perfectly. Don’t try to download a background of a webpage with the expectation that it will be in a format that is not beneficial to the pages function.

      • KubeRoot@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        52 minutes ago

        I believe they’ve made the point that it’s not chrome’s fault, but the site’s/user’s - images displayed on websites should be webp to benefit from optimizations for displaying images, but download links should be a different format. The error would be either the user downloading the images from the display instead of the download (including from sites that do not offer images for downloading purposes?), or the website not including separate versions for download where relevant.

        I’m not necessarily sure if that’s a good take, but that’s my interpretation of what’s being said.

  • Unlearned9545@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 hours ago

    WebP has all the functionality of jpg, png, and gif while still being a smaller filesize. It has baseline support across browsers and devices. I’m no Google simp and work to de-google my family and workplace but this is a hill I will die on. Webp currently the best image file format.

    • Zetta@mander.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 hours ago

      If loser companies would support it I’d say AV1 Image File Format (AVIF) is the best.

    • Dumhuvud@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Webp currently the best image file format.

      Out of the widely supported ones, it’s quite good, yeah. Overall, I’d say JPEG XL is the better one. Ironically, only Safari supports it out of the box. Firefox requires a Nightly version with tweaking in about:config. Chrome used to have a feature flag, but has since removed it.

      • brachypelmide@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        20 minutes ago

        I think compatibility was also being taken into account here. When not looking at compatibility, JXL is the best hands down. It’s criminal how little software supports it.

    • Kilgore Trout@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      It is. The sentiment comes from majority of Americans using Apple operating systems, which refused to support WebP until recently.

  • Unlearned9545@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    8 hours ago

    At this point I think Facebook messenger and internet explorer are the only ones that don’t support it. Oh and maybe the ISS.

  • devedeset@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    12 hours ago

    I actually use it for creating thumbnails for a sorta niche application. The resulting files are quite small and the quality is fine. I do remember it being a pain in the ass to deal with ~10 years ago.

  • carpelbridgesyndrome@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    21 hours ago

    The first part is wrong. And the second part is mostly wrong. Stop whining

    Pro tip: If discord is complaing your screenshots are too large convert them to avif or webp. Now you don’t need nitro

      • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 hours ago

        If you screenshot computer/phone interfaces (text, buttons, lots of flat colors with adjacent pixels the exact same color), the default PNG algorithm does a great job of keeping the file size small. If you screenshot a photograph, though, the PNG algorithm makes the file size huge, because it’s just really poorly optimized for re-encoding images that are already JPG.

      • sheogorath@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        9 hours ago

        What if I want to screenshot my cocaine-fueled rant to my ex and mistakenly send it to said ex instead of my homies?

    • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      11 hours ago

      It’s slowly marching along with the reimplementation of its reference decoder in rust. That should hopefully satisfy google and mozilla’s demands and get them to adopt it in their browsers.

    • hperrin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Because Google didn’t invent it, and Google decides what does and doesn’t get added to the Internet.

      • lengau@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        13 hours ago

        Google were literally one of the three organisations who worked on the standard, and the top contributor to the reference implementation works there.

        • hperrin@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          And then they killed it. It was Google pulling support in Chrome that killed JPEG-XL’s momentum.

          It was the Joint Picture Experts Group that invented it, so Google had no ownership over it, unlike WebP.

          Google’s stance on JPEG XL is ambiguous, as it has contributed to the format but refrained from shipping an implementation of it in its browser. Support in Chromium and Chromeweb browsers was introduced for testing April 1, 2021[29] and removed on December 9, 2022 – with support removed in version 110.[30][31]The Chrome team cited a lack of interest from the ecosystem, insufficient improvements, and a wish to focus on improving existing formats as reasons for removing JPEG XL support.[29][32][30]

          - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL

          • GamingChairModel@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 hours ago

            It was the Joint Picture Experts Group that invented it, so Google had no ownership over it, unlike WebP.

            No, JPEG called for submission of proposals to define the new standard, and Google submitted its own PIK format, which provided much of the basis for what would become the JXL standard (the other primary contribution being Cloudinary’s FUIF).

            Ultimately, I think most of the discussion around browser support thinks too small. Image formats are used for web display, sure, but they’re also used for so many other things. Digital imaging is used in medicine (where TIFF dominates), print, photography, video, etc.

            I’m excited about JPEG XL as a replacement for TIFF and raw photography sensor data, including for printing and medical imaging. WebP, AVIF, HEIF, etc. really are only aiming for replacing web distributed images on a screen.

            • hperrin@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              54 minutes ago

              So Google contributed to it, but ultimately didn’t invent it and doesn’t own it. In other words, what I said.

              As opposed to WebP, which not only do they own, they also own several patents for that cover the entire bitstream. They offer a patent license that is conditional on not suing them. So they basically own and control WebP entirely. They do not own, nor do they control, JPEG-XL. Google owns patents that cover a portion of JPEG-XL, but don’t have full control.

    • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      6 hours ago

      The compression technique it used was patented, and the licence fee was extortionate. By the time the patent expired, other, royalty-free, techniques were available that outperformed it.

  • Logical@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    Somewhat related: Does anyone know why so many of the images uploaded to Lemmy are GIFs? Or at least download in that format when using Sync? It’s kind of annoying because they aren’t animated, they are completely static images, and all that does is cause problems with sending them in other apps. I frequently have to download an image, take a screenshot of it, and crop it to the original size again.

    • Giloron@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Also, why so many comments about gifs that don’t use it’s multi image slideshow functionality. And why are the times between images set so fast these days. I can’t appreciate each image the author spent time to include.

  • Xylight@lemdro.id
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    Yes, I would like to waste 500 KB over the wire for an image of indistinguishable quality

  • Victor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    1 day ago

    I hate that Messenger doesn’t support webp. Makes sharing from Lemmy quite annoying. Signal takes webp though, no prob.

      • Victor@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        24 hours ago

        I have a better solution that I found out by accident.

        So you initiate the sharing, right, then before you select the Messenger app (or whichever app that doesn’t handle webp), you click the little edit button on the image above the shareable apps. That brings up cropping and other adjustments. But from here, you can just hit the big Share button immediately to share the image practically losslessly (without cropping mistakes and such). It brings up the share thing again but this time the image will be in a shareable format, presumably PNG(?).

        Spread the word!

        (This is on Android btw.)

        • filcuk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          24 hours ago

          Practically never because it’s rubbish. The only possible use is on old precision machines that don’t support newer standards, like medical imaging.