Memes

The only problem I have with .webp and .webm is that not that many applications support them and need to be converted first.

Ofcourse I know him. He's me

Webp is just one more instace of Google trying to own the modern web.

Give me JPEG XL or give me death, motherfuckers.

I'm still mad over the JPEG xl drama

Anakin Skywalker : I've just learned a terrible truth. I think this Chancellor Palpatine meme is a jpeg.

Mace Windu : [suprised] A jpeg?

Anakin Skywalker : Yes, the one we've been looking for.

Mace Windu : How do you know this?

Anakin Skywalker : I saved the file and it's a jpeg, not a webp.

Mace Windu : Are you sure?

Anakin Skywalker : Absolutely.

Compatibility be damned.

Jpeg is not what makes the Web slow. The dozens of requests to Google and all the add services and then the add videos.

When an addblocker makes the page loads so much faster, webp is definitely not what will save Internet.

If you look into it a bit more, the resistance around WebP is mainly because it has some crippling weaknesses. I did some visual quality testing ( here, here & here ) & I (as well as many others independently) have found that for photographic images, WebP & JPEG are equals, & Google's messaging that lossy WebP meaningfully improves upon JPEG for general visual quality per bit is misleading. That being said, WebP has some important strengths that are not often acknowledged. In addition to transparency & (really good) animation support, it also has:

• a lossless mode that often outperforms PNG
• great nonphotographic compression (though AVIF outperforms it here)
• decent compression of photographic sources at lower fidelity, where it actually starts to beat JPEG by a good amount
• Totally royalty free

WebP's main weaknesses are:

• not better than JPEG for photographic images at useful fidelity
• Confusing messaging from Google, may have led to slow adoption
• Based on a video codec, so no progressive decode (even JPEG has this)
• limited to 8 BPC (lossy & lossless)
• superseded by JPEG-XL & AVIF, which are both pretty much better at everything

JPEG-XL in particular is very promising. It faces hostility from Google but has an incredible breadth of features & strong compression performance, as well as Apple ecosystem-wide adoption on the way with the upcoming versions of macOS, iOS, ipadOS, etc. It is also royalty free. AVIF is better than WebP at everything except lossless, too.

Feeling any which way about WebP, it is still a shame to see it transcoded to PNG. All that wasted potential ...

The only thing I don't like about webp is it can either be lossy or lossless, with png and jpg you know if it's lossless or not.

I've never heard anyone complain about webp before. What's the problem?

I just hate that Meta Messenger (where I communicate most with my friends) doesn't let me share webp images. Also it labels them as gif.

Webp... For web pictures. Then why are there webp files on my non web harddrives? Give me PNG, SVG, JPEG and GIFs. Not this ugly Google shit. I never liked it in the first place. And take your shitty webm with you.

It's still a godsend for large comic book archives. Thx comicrack for supporting this wicked new format since August 2013!

edit: there's also a relatively new plugin for avif and jpegxl support.

What about the bot attack on the bitmaps?