Post #2189460
2026-04-29 19:22 UTC
@lbenedix@chaos.social not sure what I'm looking at and what you are not convinced by. What I did is I took 20 or so images with very different content. Graphics, Screenshots, Hires Photos, Normal size Photos - and took jpeg at Q100 as the reference and increased the compression until it was visibly worse at normal web sizes. For me avif was the clear winner. But jpeg-xl wasn't / isn't widespread adopted yet to consider it (at least for me)
Replies (1)
-
@lbenedix@chaos.social 2026-04-29 19:42
@hukl@chaos.social i converted roughly 500 almost identical images from a time lapse camera into avif and webp and the resulting files were larger than the input. Creating an h265 video is way better for compression of my input, but sometimes I want to see a specific frame, so I stay with the jpg from the camera.