Hacker News Reader

Comment by aidenn0 | Hacker News Reader

How many "better JPEGs" have been created now, without significantly displacing JPEG's market share?

JPEG-2000, for example, is very hard to decode in a CPU. Many implementations take a second to decode an image.

There are two really hopeful things about this new project: (1) by leveraging HEVC, we get cheap (energy efficient) and fast decode on future mobile devices and (2) Since he is demonstrating pretty quick decode in JavaScript now, it clearly isn't a CPU pig like JPEG-2000.

JPEG 2000, JPEG XR, and WebP are the best-known (e.g., not toy research projects).

Indeed. Without out-of-the-box support in the major image editors like Photoshop and all the popular web browsers, I don't think we'll see JPEG overtaken any time soon.

Honestly, just last night I was looking and editing photos of a recent trip, and I uploaded them to tumblr to share on a small photo blog I just recently started. After spending some time trying to get the colors right, I realized that tumblr's image compression is god awfully horrendous. I felt so bad looking at my source JPEGs next to the tumblr post that I created a new flickr account right then.

I don't necessarily think JPEG is bad, or that it's even Tumblr's fault that I first thought to share photos there, but if any service/software started using BPG I think I would excitedly try it out.

[e.g. http://www.huddug.com/ vs https://www.flickr.com/photos/127341162@N03/15762469070/]

If Chrome and Firefox implements this, then mod_pagespeed, for instance, can do the conversion on-the-fly also, services like CloudFlare can also do the conversion automatically.

I don't think this is a quest for world or market domination, but a great tool for people who want a better format. Works today.

The intra-frame format of every video codec.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com