this post was submitted on 29 Jun 2024
702 points (91.5% liked)

memes

10163 readers
3116 users here now

Community rules

1. Be civilNo trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour

2. No politicsThis is non-politics community. For political memes please go to [email protected]

3. No recent repostsCheck for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month

4. No botsNo bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins

5. No Spam/AdsNo advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live.

Sister communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 90 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (3 children)

Semi-related, I'm still salty about Google's rejection of JPEG XL. I can't help but remember this when webp discussion crops up, since Google were the ones who created it.

Why care about JPEG XL?Because it seems very promising. source with details.

Rejection?Google started working on JPEG XL support for chrome, then dropped it despite significant industry support. Apple is also in, by the way.

Why do that?Don't know, many possible reasons. In fairness, even Mozilla hasn't decided to fully invest in it, and libjxl hasn't defined a stable public API yet.

That said, I don't believe that's the kind of issue that'd stop Google if they wanted to push something forward. They'd find a way, funding, helping development, something.

And unfortunately for all of us, Google Chrome sort of... Immensely influences what the web is and will be. They can't excuse themselves saying "they'll work on it, if it gains traction" when them supporting anything is fundamental to it gaining traction in the first place.

You'd have to believe Google is acting in good faith for the sake of the internet and its users. I don't think I need to explain why that's far from guaranteed and in many issues incredibly unlikely.

Useless mini-rantI really need a single page with all this information I can link every time image standards in the web are mentioned. There's stuff I'm leaving out because writing these comments takes some work, especially on a phone, and I'm kinda tired of doing it.

I still hold hope for JPEG XL and that Google will cave at some point.

[–] [email protected] 28 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Yes, JPEG XL really is the one that got away. 😭

Hey Google, πŸ–•πŸ–• for killing it, man. Very evil and self-centered choice.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago (2 children)

Also I just noticed what the arrow in the image pointed to. Holy crap that would be awful if true.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Not sure what you mean by "Google killed it". JPEG XL proposal was only submitted in 2018 and it got standardized in 2022. It has a lot of features which are not available in browsers yet, like HDR support (support for HDR photos in Chrome on Android was only added 8 months ago, Firefox doesn't support HDR in any shape at all), no browsers support 32 bits per component, there's no support for thermal data or volume data, etc. You can't just plug libjxl and call it a day, you have to rework your rendering pipeline to add all these features.

I'd argue that Google is actually working pretty hard on their pipeline to add missing features. Can't say the same about Mozilla, who can't even implement HDR for videos for over a decade now.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 4 months ago (1 children)

They removed JPEG XL support from chrome. It was behind a feature flag previously.

(At least that's what I gathered from reading the screenshot.)

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 82 points 4 months ago (17 children)

Old meme.

Pretty much everything supports it now, and in case you haven't noticed pretty much all the images on Lemmy are webp because it lets instances save tons and tons on bandwidth and storage.

The next "better but not yet supported" image format is .avif.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Not the end of the world, but out of the few apps that don't fit in the 'pretty much everything' group, messenger is one of them and I can't share a good bunch of memes on Lemmy with my friends because of that. I usually end up screenshotting my own screen because of that.

[–] [email protected] 37 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

The format was introduced 13 years ago. Meta had the time, and we know they have the resources.

This is 200% on messenger being shit piece of crap software.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Avis Libre gallery can convert images from/to WEBP.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago (1 children)

What doesn’t support avif? Even Apple devices support it and they are usually the last to adopt anything. I’ve crushed all my website using it and it turns a 1MB image to 80KB without quality loss, absolutely amazing compression!

[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

In websites it works great, there isn't a browser around that can't deal with it. Same how with when webp was new you'd run into it all over the web because there they were just better and worked fine.

It's everything else that isn't ready yet. My older android device can't deal with them in apps, no AV1 decoder maybe? Dunno.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 4 months ago (1 children)

.avif is supported by all major browsers but application support sucks.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[–] maniacalmanicmania 53 points 4 months ago (2 children)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

Same. Very useful.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 29 points 4 months ago (4 children)

I hate .webp, almost no software supports it. I can see it reduces the amount of space, but I’m always having to convert it

[–] [email protected] 21 points 4 months ago (2 children)

That format is awful from a user perspective.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

How so. I get that the support isn't there yet, but how is the format itself awful

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Is this some windows problem I'm too FOSS to understand?

[–] [email protected] 12 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Not really? Just lucky.

Go back and eddit this comment when you download a webp and nothing can use it.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

I have plenty of WEBP and every image editing/viewing application I have installed can use it fine. Including, but not limited to:

pdn, GIMP, Krita, Aseprite, InkScape, OpenToonz, IrfanView

I think Apple users have issues with Webm & Webp? But the issue here is using Apple products in the first place. Losing 90% of basic functionality is what you expect when using one of those.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 24 points 4 months ago (1 children)

At least it's not a .art file

If you get this reference, remember to take your daily meds on time.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Reference acknowledged.

After all, we have CompuServe to thank for the proliferation of .gif.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Is it still a meme when you feel it in your soul?

I don't know why, maybe because it's Sunday morning and I'm just drinking my coffee and browsing around while the rest of the house sleeps in, but this triggered a rabbit hole for me. I already have a lil plugin just for quickly saving direct to PNG or JPG when I right click a WebP in my browsers, but I SHOULDN'T GODDAMN HAVE TO.

WEBP as a wrapper (as coupled along with AVIF/AV1/VP8/etc) seems all about reassertion of corporate control of web file formats by pivoting codecs back toward patent encumbrance as a control factor, just without universal royalty hooks attached to anyone that touches even free and open software utilizing it. We were actually FREE of that bullshit for a short time. PNG has no patent encumbrance. GIF, MP3, MPEG-1, MPEG-2, MPEG-4 Part 2 all have expired patents and can be used freely.

[Don't get me wrong, MPEG as an org was and is pure corruption and greed, and MPEG-4 Part 2 adoption was fully diminished outside of 'free' circles based on their stated intention to apply a 'content fee' to the royalty requirements. It's obvious why VP8 -> AV1 had to happen one way or another to break their royalty cabal insanity, but it still doesn't taste good at all. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MPEG-4_Part_2 ]

The consortium of companies behind WebP and AV1 are all taking part in the enshittification of the entire technology sector, from web sites and web apps, operating systems, and application ecosystems. Why would we ever trust them to not rug pull the 'irrevocable but revocable' patent license scheme? They only put it together in the first place to end run having to pay someone who was 'not them' any royalties for image/video/audio encoding.


References:

WEBP is patent encumbered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebP

https://github.com/ImageMagick/webp/blob/main/PATENTS

Google hereby grants to you a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free,** irrevocable (except as stated in this section) patent license** to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, transfer, and otherwise run, modify and propagate the contents of these implementations of WebM, where such license applies only to those patent claims, both currently owned by Google and acquired in the future, licensable by Google that are necessarily infringed by these implementations of WebM. This grant does not include claims that would be infringed only as a consequence of further modification of these implementations.

GIF is not patent encumbered since 2004.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIF

In 2004, all patents relating to the proprietary compression used for GIF expired.

PNG was never patent encumbered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNG

PNG was developed as an improved, non-patented replacement for Graphics Interchange Format (GIF)β€”unofficially, the initials PNG stood for the recursive acronym "PNG's not GIF".

AV1, VP8, VP9, and other modernized "open source" or "free" Video Codecs all appear to be patent encumbered.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23747923

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AV1

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AVIF

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VP8

[–] [email protected] 13 points 4 months ago

Shit, you've got me mad too

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

AV1, VP8, VP9, and other modernized "open source" or "free" Video Codecs all appear to be patent encumbered.

MPEG LA(patent trolls, not to be confused with ISO MPEG) tried to claim that AV1 uses their patents, but failed.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 4 months ago (1 children)

convert image.webp image.png

[–] [email protected] 6 points 4 months ago (1 children)

On Android, use Share image from Firefox or similar, then click the edit icon before sharing (on the share sheet that pops up), then just immediately share without modifications. It'll share it as a new PNG I'm pretty sure. Dang Facebook Messenger that won't accept WebP and I have to do this so many times.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Facebook Messenger

That's your problem right there.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 19 points 4 months ago (3 children)

Linux and Android handles .webp just fine tho, in windows try open source image viewer like imageglass and everything gonna work just fine, speaking from experience i had, just as most people here i hated that webp doesn't open until i understood that open source image viewers handle it just fine, then i liked that file format cause it's versatile i mean, it can be picture or animation like gif, and compression feels better

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago (4 children)

Webp works fine for me now.

The problem is AVIF. I mean I love AVIF (almost as much as JPEG-XL), but it doesn't work with anything except browser web pages, even after all this time.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago

For me webp is always some gif I'm trying to text people, and now I have to go convert it.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] [email protected] 17 points 4 months ago (4 children)

I wouldn’t mind the webp format if programs supported it!

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (4 children)

Use greenhouse to capture a region. Thats how I pirate all my memes

Edit: Greenshot

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 10 points 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago (1 children)

(I also have no love for .webm as a video format)

[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

It's just mp4 dumbed down which itself is mkv in stupid form.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

Webp is great for web images though, it's very efficient

JXL is always in my heart though πŸͺ¦

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 8 points 4 months ago

Ezgif.com has a webp converter

load more comments
view more: next β€Ί