Gianni Rosato The case against JPEG XL
https:/
JPEG XL isn't useless; it is genuinely compelling technology for use cases beyond the Web. I'm just not personally convinced we need it in browsers any time soon.
Related contents with similar topics
-
The present and potential future of progressive image rendering
So if the browser manages to download 6 kB then stalls, then AVIF can produce a better result. But since the AVIF rendering is only two-pass, if the…
-
kliksphilip
JPEG VS AVIF - The Battle of Compression
In this super thorough study I test one single HD image and come to vast sweeping conclusions about JPEG XL and AVIF. But that's still one image comparison…
-
Jeremy Gray
Why Apple Uses JPEG XL in the iPhone 16 and What it Means for Your Photos
For iPhone photographers, the benefits far outweigh the potential downsides. There’s little doubt that JPEG XL is an excellent image format that offers…
-
Should I please Lighthouse with modern image formats, or my visitors with progressive rendering of large images in my photography site? 🤔
Of course, this would be much easier with genaralized JPEG XL support, both modern and allowing progressive… 🤷♂️
-
Most mentions of the magical CSS
object-fit: cover;in development tutorials should be accompanied by a warning: in most situations, it means the browser will download an image that is larger than required (at least in one direction), and optimization on the server side could be a better option.
Jake Archibald
