solomon42069,

Your downvotes are high because your opinion is wrong, but feel free to lol in ignorance of technology.

Stamets,
@Stamets@lemmy.world avatar

A meme community? Making jokes? No…

awesome357,

From someone using foundry, please continue to use webp and webm… Foundry easily supports it and the file sizes are much smaller making them take up much less space on my server. And upload faster, and load faster for me and my players, and let me upload larger maps for my players as they render easier.

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

My god, yes. The .webp file format is consistently half the size of .jpeg and improves load times considerably.

Also, just use paint.net like a normal person. Or GIMP. Practically any image editor worth the name will let you save in .webp format and every browser can handle it.

IronKrill,

The problem is rather the opposite of the meme. The file format is fine, but there is so little effort into making it happen.

If we were trying then I should be able to upload webp images everywhere. The most egregious is websites that will convert jpg and png uploads to webp but don’t allow webp upload.

Wilzax,

webp isn’t fine, it has a ton of vulnerabilities because it’s not a safe file format. It gets to do too much and it’s insecure for that reason. That’s why you can’t upload your own webp but conversion to it is fine

carpelbridgesyndrome,

The format is fine. The rate of bugs in image parsing code in general is alarming but that is true of just about all the formats.

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

it has a ton of vulnerabilities because it’s not a safe file format

Its a high compression image file, ffs. If someone sends you a 10 mb .webp file, that should be setting off alarm bells right off the bat. Even then, I have to ask what the hell your Windows Viewer app thinks it should be allowed to do with the file shy of rendering it into pixels on the screen.

propaganja,

I mean, it sounds like you’re saying, “I don’t know how it can be dangerous, therefore it’s not dangerous.”

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

All I’m hearing is that “its not safe” without further details. And given the utility relative to .jpeg, I’d like more on the table than just “Don’t do it! Unsafe!”

propaganja,

I agree the claim requires more evidence and it would be foolish to just take it at face value, but even if my intuition told me it was intrinsically safe I wouldn’t place any degree of trust in my own logical conclusions, or discount someone else’s warnings, however spurious.

The burden of proof should never be on the accuser when it comes to safety, in my opinion, or anything else of public concern. And the standard of proof should be higher to show that everything’s ok than to show that it’s not. At least in an ideal world.

UnderpantsWeevil,
@UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world avatar

I wouldn’t place any degree of trust in my own logical conclusions

Okay, but then why use .jpeg?

The burden of proof should never be on the accuser when it comes to safety

How does the .webp protocol demonstrate itself at least as safe as any other standard format? There’s no established safety standard for image protocols that I’m aware of.

carpelbridgesyndrome,

As someone who has had to put together websites:

  • It is supported by every major browser
  • It is halving the amount of your mobile data that I am using sending you images (With lossy compression it does even better)
  • It is decreasing my network egress costs
  • It is increasing the number of connections I can serve in a given time period

Nope I am not going to stop using this or AVIF (which does better)

Pantsofmagic,

It would be nice if mobile browsers/apps would convert them. When I save a webp and want to share it… Whelp, can’t do that - doesn’t even show up in the list of images.

Microw,

Or if OS and media apps would simply Support it like they do with dozens other media formats

Apollo,

Webp is superior to jpg and far smaller than png. Making a map tile that has transparency and is bigger than 20x20 grid squares leaves you the choice between a huge png or a tiny webp. VTTs like foundry have best practice guidelines re image sizes and formats and it is simply not possible to follow these using png unless the map in question is tiny, and if you ignore them and just go for a huge png your players may be faced with lag, longer loading times etc.

awesome357,

Also some computers will just fail to load larger png’s from foundry, leaving some players with a black background. Never had that happen with a webp.

balderdash9,
vox,
@vox@sopuli.xyz avatar
rbesfe,
Blisterexe,

Sync user!

Smorty,

Isn’t sync proprietary?

Blisterexe,

I don’t think so, but it might be

plague_sapiens,
@plague_sapiens@lemmy.world avatar

With Alexandrite (a.lemmy.world for example) you can activate or deactivate webp.

LucidLethargy,

People just really need to support it. It’s far better than jpg or png. It’s the go-to for web right now, that’s for sure.

hansl,

Not better than jpegXL which has clearer free licensing.

LucidLethargy,

Only Apple supports this. Like, literally just Apple. I hate Chrome, and even Chrome doesn’t support this. Firefox? Yeah, zero support.

So for these reasons it’s 100% not viable right now. If you get the support, I’ll consider it for my websites, and tell my colleagues about it, though.

UndercoverUlrikHD,

Firefox supports JXL just fine and chrome did support it, but pulled support shortly after.

LucidLethargy,

This is the source I used to originally validate my position: caniuse.com/jpegxl

Let me know if it’s incorrect, I’d be very interested to learn of new options for the web space as a developer. This said, I googled Firefox and it came back with only “experimental support” for what I think may be an alpha release (version number ends in “a”).

UndercoverUlrikHD,

I think you still need to enable JXL in the config, but it seems to display just fine once enabled.

Adding support for JXL in windows was much more of a hassle and doesn’t always display properly in the file preview. Hopefully windows follows Apple’s step soon and adds native support.

I guess as a Web developer it won’t matter until the JXL toggle is enabled by default though.

balderdash9,

But why is it better? My experience is clicking on webp format opens in browser instead of my image viewer

somerefriedbeans,

People just really need to support it.

This right here sir. You missed this part.

balderdash9,

I’m a layperson. I don’t care about what technical benefits it has on paper when its impractical to use. So I have to agree with OP on this one.

Stumblinbear,
@Stumblinbear@pawb.social avatar

I haven’t seen a single browser that didn’t support webp

Microw,

Lots of image viewers and media programs/apps dont support it currently. Which is a hassle when you’ve downloaded a webp and cant view or edit it.

AlphaOmega,

Webp supports 24 - bit RGB w 8 - bit Alpha channel. It also has better lossless and lossly compression. And it handles transparency and animation better than other formats at a smaller size.

It is smaller, better, and faster.

balderdash9,

I wish everyone would get on the same page so it would also be better for the end user.

art,
@art@lemmy.world avatar

Sounds like you need upgrade your image viewer? Everything else is loading it fine.

balderdash9,

I use FastStone Image Viewer. Maybe there’s a plug-in I need to install?

regbin_,

WebP is awesome. So is JPEG-XL.

JPEG and PNG are archaic and should die already.

.jxl is also coming btw

stebo02,
@stebo02@sopuli.xyz avatar

I think webp is great but every time I download a webp meme to send it to my Facebook-only friends, I have to take a screenshot of the image because for some reason messenger doesn’t recognize webp images. Like cmon Zuck why can’t you do anything good…

frezik,

JPEG will never die. Too many things support it at a very basic level. A random CCD camera module on DigiKey probably has an option for direct JPEG output. An 8-bit Arduino will know how to take that JPEG and display it on a cheap 4" LCD screen off Bang Good.

Formats that sprawl everywhere like that will never, ever die.

crystal,

(Which makes JpegXL even better)

IamRoot,

Praise him!

confusedbytheBasics,

Huh? I’m pretty sure nobody important is trying to make webp happen in 2023.

SirQuackTheDuck,

Google is really pushing it through, and since it’s usually easy to get small files from webp, a lot of sites support it

confusedbytheBasics,

Thanks. I remember Google news showing an article about them already deprecating webp but now I don’t see it. I wonder what format the article was about.

Stumblinbear,
@Stumblinbear@pawb.social avatar

JpegXL

IphtashuFitz,

Akamai supports it as a transparent speed optimization for clients who want it. My employers website is fairly image-heavy and we use Akamai’s Image Manager to optimize images for us. The first time an image is fetched by their CDN they analyze it to optimize it for size, compression, and image type, and all the rendered versions are cached on their CDN. When a client requests the image Akamai will look at the characteristics of the device and serve the best optimized version of the image.

confusedbytheBasics,

That is pretty nice IMO. So if you have Safari does it autoconvert to jpeg xl?

IphtashuFitz,

Not sure, but thy might. They’re constantly looking for ways to reduce traffic by even a couple bytes. They claim their servers see something like 30% of all web traffic, so if they can squeeze even a few bytes more out of something then it can have a pretty big impact overall.

One other thing they recently rolled out is a similar form of transparent support for Brotli compression. Many websites, CDN’s, etc. will automatically compress fonts, JavaScript, etc. using gzip if the client browser supports it (and most do). Brotli is a newer compression algorithm that sometimes is better than gzip, but not always. Many browsers now support Brotli as an option along with gzip, so Akamai will transparently convert gzipped items to Brotli, and if it generates a smaller file then they’ll serve that version to browsers that support it.

wax,

I’ve personally used webp for when I need lossy compression with alpha channel. What good alternatives are there? Png is not lossy and jpeg does not support alpha. Is JXL better than WebP? AVIF? JPEG2000?

ilinamorato,

pngout can often get image sizes down below equivalent jpeg without quality loss. And it’s not a new format, just optimizing the existing png file.

rasensprenger,

JXL is nice, but lacks support as well

Stumblinbear,
@Stumblinbear@pawb.social avatar

WebP is also great for doing animations with transparency on mobile. Transparent video is barely supported and gif is terrible. WebP is really the only option

uis,
@uis@lemmy.world avatar

Works for me.

AstridWipenaugh, (edited )

If jpg and png were good enough for dialup, they’re good enough for gigabit.

unoriginalsin,

You clearly don’t recall watching jpegs load on dialup internet. It could literally take minutes to load a decent sized image on 14.4 modems.

AstridWipenaugh,

I remember. Finished halfway through kathy_ireland_nude_boobs.jpeg

Burninator05,

At least you got the right one. I accidently got kathy_ireland_nude_boobs.jpeg.bat. It was not the happy day I hoped it would be.

LucidLethargy,

Tell that to Google’s SEO ratings. A website using jpeg’s is not going to do well.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • uselessserver093
  • Food
  • [email protected]
  • aaaaaaacccccccce
  • test
  • CafeMeta
  • testmag
  • MUD
  • RhythmGameZone
  • RSS
  • dabs
  • oklahoma
  • Socialism
  • KbinCafe
  • TheResearchGuardian
  • SuperSentai
  • feritale
  • KamenRider
  • All magazines