Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Sep 2010 23:04 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 443416
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
I guess they didn't use the JPEG on the left hand side to create the WebP on the right, I guess they just used the same source picture to create both.
EDIT: Apart from being a logical explanation, this would also be the thing that makes the most sense, as they want to compare both codecs with each other.
Edited 2010-10-01 15:17 UTC




Member since:
2009-04-08
Funny you mention that. How is it possible that source image has more compression artifacts than their WEBP version? I noticed this on image 5. Control-+ until the images are enlarged and look on the left at the yellow bricks. On the JPEG version you can't make out the individual bricks, but on the WEBP version you can. I noticed this on most images here. Most JPEG edge artifacts are gone on their WEBP counterparts. Even if the originals are just scaled down, you should still always see less detail on recompressed images.