Google Wants to Speed Up the Web by Killing the JPEG
petapixel.com
petapixel.com
http://code.google.com/speed/webp/gallery.html
WebP might be great, but how can it be a meaningful comparison --
1) take already compressed jpegs from wikipedia and re-compress them using WebP, and then tout the 39% file compression achieved? I can re-compress Jpeg with more Jpeg and also get 39% "more" compression.
2) as with all lossy compression, unless there is some measure of the loss, perceptual or otherwise, what are we really comparing?
2) How do we know we couldn't get the same perceptual gains from more JPEG compression?
(Not only is this thread a dupe, but every single comment as well. Nice.)
* thumbnails of jpegs on picasa web galleries
* thumbnails of jpegs & pngs on Google image search
* thumbnails of videos on Youtube
* an Opera Turbo/Mini style proxy server that recompresses jpegs and pngs
* a turnkey web-accelerator that recompresses all the images on your site and serves the WebP ones to compatible browsers without you needing to do anything
However, I don't think anything like this has actually been announced. Without such announcements the methodology does seem strange.
The comments are also worth reading.
This might be interesting http://github.com/antimatter15/weppy using JS and canvas to display the file format.