Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 30th Sep 2010 23:04 UTC
Google A few months ago, Google open sourced the VP8 video codec as part of the WebM video project, to create a truly Free/free unencumbered video format for the web as an answer to the non-Free/free patent-encumbered H264 format. Today, Google launched a new image format for the web, WebP, which aims to significantly reduce the file size of photos and images on the web.
Thread beginning with comment 443422
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Comment by mercury
by FunkyELF on Fri 1st Oct 2010 14:32 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Comment by mercury"
Member since:

There would be zero improvement.
The JPG was the source.

What they need to do is shoot RAW and export to TIFF or PNG. From the TIFF/PNG convert to both JPG and this new format.

That would be a comparison.

What they're showing here is that you can compress already compressed files at a loss (although seemingly small).

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Comment by mercury
by dagw on Fri 1st Oct 2010 20:51 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by mercury"
dagw Member since:

Realistically thought compressing already processed jpegs is probably the most likely use case for the web. I have 20 thousand or so jpegs in my htdocs folder right now. If I can run a script over them and re-compress them in a new format and get smaller files without too much loss of quality them I'm totally interested. If on the other hand I have to go back to the unprocessed original and start from to get any benefits, then I kind of lost interest.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Comment by mercury
by flanque on Sat 2nd Oct 2010 00:36 in reply to "RE[3]: Comment by mercury"
flanque Member since:

Well they do appear in certain spots to be less noisy.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[5]: Comment by mercury
by chiefrain on Sat 2nd Oct 2010 22:58 in reply to "RE[4]: Comment by mercury"
chiefrain Member since:

You don't get the point: The mission of image compression is to reduce the size of the image with a minimal loss of information.
You may talk about different kinds of information loss, and you may prefer some kinds of loss over other kinds of loss. But you cannot talk about improvement. Any change of the image caused by the compression technique - whether you find it improving or not - is a change, and thus it is bad.
If you want to "improve" an image, you use other techniques (sharpening, blurring, scratch detection, etc.). And then you get a new "original" that you may try to compress with different compression techniques.

Reply Parent Score: 1