Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Looks like it’s not very competitive at low bitrates. I have a project that currently encodes images with MozJPEG at quality 60 and just tried switching it to Jpegli. When tuned to produce comparable file sizes (--distance=4.0) the Jpegli images are consistently worse.


What is your use case for degrading image quality that much? At quality level 80 the artifacts are already significant.


Thumbnails at a high pixel density. I just want them up fast. Any quality that can be squeezed out of it is a bonus.


JPEG has a fixed macroblock size (16x16 pixels), which negatively affects high resolution low bitrate images.

If you must use JPEG, I suspect you might get better visual quality by halving the resolution and upsampling on the client.

By doing so, you are effectively setting the lower and right halves of the DCT to zero (losing all high resolution info), but get to have 32x32 pixel macroblocks which lets you better make use of low frequency spacial patterns.


Oh, that's interesting. I typically serve thumbnails at 2x resolution and heavily compressed. Should I try to instead compress them less but serve at 0.5x resolution?


I'd say it's worth a try.


I recently noticed that all the thumbnails on my computer are PNG, which I thought was funny.


Thumbnails. I typically serve them at 2x resolution but extremely heavily compressed. Still looks good enough in browser when scaled down.


I apologize that this will seem like, well it IS frankly, more reaction than is really justified, sorry for that. But this question is an example of a thing people commonly do that I think is not good and I want to point it out once in a while when I see it:

There are infinite use-cases for everything beside one's own tiny personal experience and imagination. It's not remarkable that someone tested for the best version of something you personally don't have a use for.

Pretend they hadn't answered the question. The answer is it doesn't matter.

They stated a goal of x, and compared present-x against testing-x and found present-x was the better-x.

"Why do they want x when I only care about y?" is irrelevant.

I mean you may be idly curious and that's not illegal, but you also stated a reason for the question which makes the question not idle but a challenge (the "when I only care about y" part).

What I mean by "doesn't matter" is, whatever their use-case is, it's automatically always valid, and so it doesn't change anything, and so it doesn't matter.

Their answer happened to be something you probably agree is a valid use-case, but that's just happenstance. They don't have to have a use-case you happen to approve of or even understand.


I believe that they should be roughly the same in a photography corpus density at quality 60. Consider filing an issue if some image is worse with jpegli.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: