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 443602
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[15]: Comment by hornett
by Gusar on Sun 3rd Oct 2010 12:09 UTC in reply to "RE[14]: Comment by hornett"
Gusar
Member since:
2010-07-16

WebP *is* VP8. It's the same libvpx creating the video I posted and WebP images. But ok, you want an images comparison? Here you go:

To create the jpeg, I used GIMP and saved the original with a quality of 30. Why that low? So you can easily see the difference to the original. For webp I used 'webpconv -quality 51', so the filesize was approximately the same - 38415 bytes for jpeg, 38826 bytes for webp.
Then I converted the webp image to png, for easy viewing in the browser.

Original: http://www.imagebam.com/image/c5ce0e100464038
Jpeg: http://www.imagebam.com/image/4b0505100464040
WebP converted to png: http://www.imagebam.com/image/4ae1f4100464043

WebP, before converting to png: http://www.sendspace.com/file/2nnbc9

The background is annoyingly blocky on the jpeg, at quality 30, that's no surprise. But look at the cat. Looks very ok in the jpeg, looks like quite a blur in webp.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[16]: Comment by hornett
by Neolander on Sun 3rd Oct 2010 14:09 in reply to "RE[15]: Comment by hornett"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

In my opinion, the cat does look blocky too in JPEG... But well, I suppose it's a matter of taste.

Reply Parent Score: 2