• @AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    83 months ago

    Spectral JPEG XL utilizes a technique used with human-visible images, a math trick called a discrete cosine transform (DCT), to make these massive files smaller […] it then applies a weighting step, dividing higher-frequency spectral coefficients by the overall brightness (the DC component), allowing less important data to be compressed more aggressively.

    This all sounds like standard jpeg compression. Is it just jpeg with extra channels?

    • @Prok@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      103 months ago

      Yeah, it compresses better too though, and jpeg XL can be configured to compress lossless, which I imagine would also work here

    • @wischi@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      5
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      It’s not just like jpeg with extra channels. It’s technically far superior, supports loss less compression, and the way the decompression works would make thumbnails obsolete. It can even recompress already existing JPEGs even smaller without additional generation loss. It’s hard to describe what a major step this format would be without getting very technical. A lot of operating systems and software already support it, but the Google chrome team is practically preventing widespread adoption because of company politics.

      https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40168998

        • @wischi@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          6
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          JPEG does not support lossless compression. There was an extension to the standard in 1993 but most de/encoders don’t implement that and it never took off. With JPEG XL you get more bang for your buck and the same visual quality will get you a smaller file. There would be no more need for thumbnails because of improved progressive decoding.

          https://youtu.be/UphN1_7nP8U

          • @uis@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            23 months ago

            Then same can be said about JPEG LS and JPEG XL. Most browsers don’t implement that.

        • @wischi@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          23 months ago

          JPEG does not support lossless compression. There was an extension to the standard in 1993 but most de/encoders don’t implement that and it never took off. With JPEG XL you get more bang for your buck and the same visual quality will get you a smaller file. There would be no more need for thumbnails because of improved progressive decoding.

          https://youtu.be/UphN1_7nP8U