mads

genius among idiots

  • she/her

Trans CS college student

Will talk about minecraft and celeste at any possible moment.



arborelia
@arborelia

I at least understand now what webp is for. It's like png but it supports lossy compression, while keeping the alpha channel and not fucking up all the lines like jpeg would

  • of course that means we have to trust hosting platforms that use webp not to crank up the compression and ruin people's art

  • Google is pushing it really hard so that alone is a reason to dislike it. Let trans authors of published papers change names in your silly Google Scholar and then maybe I'll reconsider changing image formats

  • like 90% of my software supports webp, and y'know 100% would be nice, but until then every webp is going to be moderately irritating to work with, and I'll probably just screenshot it to get a png

meanwhile! JPEG XL is really cool! I have never seen any software that supports it but I wish I had. We've gotten way better at photorealistic image compression since 1992. I would love to see JXL get even the 90% support that webp has

  • yes this means people would come across .jxl images and be as annoyed by them as they are by .webp right now

  • end users can actually see why JPEG would need to be improved though

  • google is fighting against it so I like it

  • apparently you can make cool glitch art by hand-editing .jxl files? I want to see that and play with it

  • if google wants to make webp the next thing, they should get in line behind JPEG XL

  • why is Firefox not picking up Google's fumble here


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @arborelia's post: