Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
EricBauman
Nov 30, 2005

DOLF IS RECHTVAARDIG
what is webp even for?

what does it achieve that other formats dont offer?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Cybernetic Vermin
Apr 18, 2005

EricBauman posted:

what is webp even for?

what does it achieve that other formats dont offer?

i have to imagine some on2 people climbed the corporate ladder effectively at google considering how many waves that relatively small acquisition has made

Powerful Two-Hander
Mar 10, 2004

Mods please change my name to "Tooter Skeleton" TIA.


EricBauman posted:

what is webp even for?

what does it achieve that other formats dont offer?

it's a special format for weaboos so it's optimised for anime

pseudorandom name
May 6, 2007

EricBauman posted:

what is webp even for?

what does it achieve that other formats dont offer?

it compresses better than PNG or JPEG, and the lossy mode supports alpha channels

super nailgun
Jan 1, 2014


Sweevo posted:

webp is dogshit and anyone who uses it should be flogged

quoting for the new page, gently caress webp

Shame Boy
Mar 2, 2010

it lets google not pay licensing fees for something or another

pseudorandom name
May 6, 2007

nah, they were already not paying licensing fees for PNG or JPEG

the use case is it is 2010 and you are Google or Facebook and your largest growth market are cell phone users in India and PNG and JPEG just aren't good enough anymore and you have the resources to build the automated tooling to ingest images in any format and transcode them to the formats your app can display

you stealing images from web sites and failing to open them in your pirated copy of photoshop wasn't a design goal

Pythagoras a trois
Feb 19, 2004

I have a lot of points to make and I will make them later.

Sagebrush posted:

in the good timeline we replaced all images on the internet with https://qoiformat.org/

this is cool but qoi is absolutely the wrong file extension, yeesh

mediaphage
Mar 22, 2007

Excuse me, pardon me, sheer perfection coming through

Pythagoras a trois posted:

this is cool but qoi is absolutely the wrong file extension, yeesh

hard to read hard to say

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN

pseudorandom name posted:

it compresses better than PNG or JPEG, and the lossy mode supports alpha channels

the lossless mode supports an alpha channel too

but both are limited to an 8-bit depth and 4:2:0 subsampling. webp sucks rear end

Eeyo
Aug 29, 2004

what about heic

Pythagoras a trois
Feb 19, 2004

I have a lot of points to make and I will make them later.

mediaphage posted:

hard to read hard to say

.pos

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN
there are a bunch of different formats (HEIC, BPG, HEIF, …) based off of HEVC but that makes them pretty complex to encode and decode. they are all pretty similar and despite some pretty minor differences are for the most part better than webp

i'd say jpeg xl is probably the best successor to jpeg and png but lol google got mad and ripped support for it out of chromium a few months ago. meanwhile apple just added support for it in ios 17 and sonoma

Eeyo
Aug 29, 2004

next apple campaign: a bunch of twee millennials walking about in the california oak chaparral. someone takes out their iphone, white text: take a heic

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN
basing a still image format off of intra frame encoding of whatever the latest ITU or MPEG standard is really isn't a terrible idea but HEVC is already outdated, VVC/H.266 is the new hotness. keeping up with their developments would continue to be a problem as would the related increase in complexity. then there's the licensing issues

JPEG-XL is already better at compressing still images than webp, HEIC or even AVIF though, and afaik it's royalty free

Shame Boy
Mar 2, 2010

someone should adopt jpeg 2000, as a joke

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN

Shame Boy posted:

someone should adopt jpeg 2000, as a joke

fun fact: almost everything supports jp2 but almost nobody uses it for still images. but it's a video codec too and i've mainly come across it used for that since it compresses pretty well, encodes/decodes pretty quickly and supports an alpha channel. it's an under-appreciated format imo

e: it also uses the mp4 container, so if something supports h.264 or even mpeg-4 ASP it's not terribly difficult to support jp2 also

Beeftweeter fucked around with this message at 18:08 on Nov 8, 2023

Cybernetic Vermin
Apr 18, 2005

qoi indeed seems cool but metadata and stuff like colorspaces matter. they are also not that hard to do on the format level, but too boring i guess.

The Leck
Feb 27, 2001

Midjack posted:

haldeman is a pretty decent guy.
i was pretty confused until my brain caught up and realized you meant Joe, not H. R.

Eeyo
Aug 29, 2004

frank reynolds trying to get a sign of a hot dog printed from an attractive woman at a print shop

oh woops i dropped my xl jpeg that i use for my magnum dog

pseudorandom name
May 6, 2007

Beeftweeter posted:

the lossless mode supports an alpha channel too
yeah, so does PNG

Beeftweeter posted:

but both are limited to an 8-bit depth and 4:2:0 subsampling. webp sucks rear end
I think you'll find that 2010 computers and phones were also limited to 8-bit color depth

Beeftweeter posted:

i'd say jpeg xl is probably the best successor to jpeg and png but lol google got mad and ripped support for it out of chromium a few months ago. meanwhile apple just added support for it in ios 17 and sonoma
Google looked at JPEG XL, an image format created by Google, and AVIF, an image format created by Google, and decided that AVIF, the image format with already existing and growing hardware-decoding support was better than the image format that nothing supported.

Cybernetic Vermin
Apr 18, 2005

pseudorandom name posted:

yeah, so does PNG

I think you'll find that 2010 computers and phones were also limited to 8-bit color depth

Google looked at JPEG XL, an image format created by Google, and AVIF, an image format created by Google, and decided that AVIF, the image format with already existing and growing hardware-decoding support was better than the image format that nothing supported.

:rolleyes:

Internet Janitor
May 17, 2008

"That isn't the appropriate trash receptacle."
the most infuriating thing about .webp is everybody who has apparently decided to switch to a bleeding-edge google format without bothering to provide fallback to image formats that have been supported everywhere for two decades at this point like .jpeg, .png, and .gif

Chalks
Sep 30, 2009

fisting by many posted:

you can't magically seo your way past 2mb of ad javascript making a website unresponsive

google sucks for a lot of reasons but this is a big nothing (and also, nothing new -- this has been part of their ranking for years and they've been very loud about it)

you can play around with the weights here -- https://googlechrome.github.io/lighthouse/scorecalc/ (i don't think google uses exactly the lighthouse metrics in their ranking but they suggest it's something close)

basically as long as your website is rendered and responsive with 1s it's perfect, and that seems reasonable? no idea how much they derank slow sites but it's not a death penalty or anything as evidenced by the fact that news sites still show up on the first page.

they reduce the size of their advert spam scripts and put them at the bottom of the page. now all the seo obsessed spammers have faster pages are at the top of the search results and the old website with the information i want is at the bottom. cool.

every time google does something besides "make the most relevant content appear first" it loving sucks.

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN

pseudorandom name posted:

yeah, so does PNG

I think you'll find that 2010 computers and phones were also limited to 8-bit color depth

Google looked at JPEG XL, an image format created by Google, and AVIF, an image format created by Google, and decided that AVIF, the image format with already existing and growing hardware-decoding support was better than the image format that nothing supported.

lmao what

2010 phones and computers were absolutely not limited to 8-bit color depth. to pick a random example even jpeg2000 released in — wait for it — 2000, supports up to 38-bit images, better chroma subsampling and alpha planes

and JPEG-XL and AVIF were not created by google

qirex
Feb 15, 2001

I was doing 32 bit color for print on a 132 mhz computer in 1998

Shaggar
Apr 26, 2006

Sweevo posted:

webp is dogshit and anyone who uses it should be flogged

web p and we bm both suck rear end

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN
also jxl doesn't need hardware support to exceed the performance of AVIF, HEIC or webp. that's kind of the point

and it was just released in 2021. of course not much supports it. but chromium did, and then it suddenly didn't

Midjack
Dec 24, 2007



Chalks posted:


every time google does something it loving sucks.

pseudorandom name
May 6, 2007

Beeftweeter posted:

lmao what

2010 phones and computers were absolutely not limited to 8-bit color depth. to pick a random example even jpeg2000 released in — wait for it — 2000, supports up to 38-bit images, better chroma subsampling and alpha planes
what phones/tablets or monitors supported HDR in 2010? TVs didn't start getting HDR specs until 2014, and PC monitor HDR support has consistently lagged behind TVs.

Beeftweeter posted:

and JPEG-XL and AVIF were not created by google
ok, fine, JPEG XL was created by Google and Cloudinary, and AVIF was created by Google and a bunch of other AOM members

Manzoon
Oct 12, 2005

ALPHASTRIKE!!!

Someone smarter than me please tell me why I can just change the file extension of a webp to jpg and it just works. What is being lost if anything in rendering that?

mystes
May 31, 2006

I think Google likes stuff like webp because they're hyper focused on the needs of companies like Google where when you're serving a billion copies of something it's worth generating a bunch of different formats of everything and choosing the smallest supported one for each client

I doubt it's actually worth the effort to do that for most people

post hole digger
Mar 21, 2011

mystes posted:

I think Google likes stuff like webp because they're hyper focused on the needs of companies like Google where when you're serving a billion copies of something it's worth generating a bunch of different formats of everything and choosing the smallest supported one for each client

I doubt it's actually worth the effort to do that for most people

this is waht people said about kubernetes too

infernal machines
Oct 11, 2012

we monitor many frequencies. we listen always. came a voice, out of the babel of tongues, speaking to us. it played us a mighty dub.

Manzoon posted:

Someone smarter than me please tell me why I can just change the file extension of a webp to jpg and it just works. What is being lost if anything in rendering that?

if it's anything like tumblr and their snowflake file extensions, it's because the only difference is the extension and the actual file is still a jpeg

Beeftweeter
Jun 28, 2005

OFFICIAL #1 GNOME FAN

pseudorandom name posted:

what phones/tablets or monitors supported HDR in 2010? TVs didn't start getting HDR specs until 2014, and PC monitor HDR support has consistently lagged behind TVs.

ok, fine, JPEG XL was created by Google and Cloudinary, and AVIF was created by Google and a bunch of other AOM members

there weren't really specs for what we call HDR today back then, but that doesn't mean there wasn't support for it in hardware or software. qirex's post is a good example,

qirex posted:

I was doing 32 bit color for print on a 132 mhz computer in 1998

CRTs certainly supported 32-bit color, even back then (and way before). around 2010 finding a pro level LCD monitor with a 24- or 16-bit panel wasn't that hard. even extremely cheap ones were 14- or 12-bit, claimed to be 16-bit and just dithered it down. i mean, finding an explicitly 8-bit panel would probably have been more difficult than finding one with a higher color depth

like for example the iphone 3g, released in 2008, had an 18-bit panel

pseudorandom name
May 6, 2007

mystes posted:

I think Google likes stuff like webp because they're hyper focused on the needs of companies like Google where when you're serving a billion copies of something it's worth generating a bunch of different formats of everything and choosing the smallest supported one for each client

I doubt it's actually worth the effort to do that for most people

see also: Zopfli, Guetzli, Brotli, Snappy, Zstandard, LZFSE, and the general renaissance in lossless compression algorithms we've had for the past decade

Internet Old One
Dec 6, 2021

Coke Adds Life

post hole digger posted:

this is waht people said about kubernetes too

and kubernetes was a mistake for most enterprises who adopted it.

Manzoon
Oct 12, 2005

ALPHASTRIKE!!!

infernal machines posted:

if it's anything like tumblr and their snowflake file extensions, it's because the only difference is the extension and the actual file is still a jpeg

It just seems so crazy. I'll get a webp that I want to upload to discord and it will not work, then just rename the file to .jpg and presto!

Cybernetic Vermin
Apr 18, 2005

Beeftweeter posted:

there weren't really specs for what we call HDR today back then, but that doesn't mean there wasn't support for it in hardware or software. qirex's post is a good example,

CRTs certainly supported 32-bit color, even back then (and way before). around 2010 finding a pro level LCD monitor with a 24- or 16-bit panel wasn't that hard. even extremely cheap ones were 14- or 12-bit, claimed to be 16-bit and just dithered it down. i mean, finding an explicitly 8-bit panel would probably have been more difficult than finding one with a higher color depth

like for example the iphone 3g, released in 2008, had an 18-bit panel

also the moment you have a colorspace difference (or a lot of other transforms) the extra bits are useful even if the ultimate output doesn't manage to differentiate between more than 256 levels of a channel

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

BMan
Oct 31, 2015

KNIIIIIIFE
EEEEEYYYYE
ATTAAAACK


why would you name a compression format XL, shouldn't it be Xtra Small

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply