Copy image? Nope, here’s the link instead.
You must log in or # to comment.
How is that the formats fault? Your browser sucks.
My pain isn’t in the browser, it’s with other apps that are still playing catch-up.
A lot of apps have added support now, but there are still edge cases. Animated webp being one. If i send that in a messaging app, usually all the other person sees is the first frame.
It’s absolutely not the fault of the format, I agree, but still a cause of compatibility headaches.
You use shitty app it is not fault of format
I never had problems with webp. Neither on android nor on my computer. I can copy and paste the images without problems. What kind of software are you guys using?
Sometimes blorp had problems downloading .webp images, but I’m pretty sure the dev fixed it; i haven’t seen those errors in a long time.
Uhh, Firefox. I’ll copy the image and paste it to signal, for example. It’s dumb. I didn’t want to save it, I just want to copy and paste it.
Finally someone said it
The person who belongs in extra hell is whoever decided not to implement support for heic natively in Windows.
Licensing bullshit
https://www.reddit.com/r/Windows10/comments/8ptbss/comment/e0dv1d4/?context=3
https://www.zdnet.com/article/if-vlc-can-ship-a-free-dvd-player-why-cant-microsoft/
Explains it well.
Tldr: VLC is in France and doesn’t have to respect copyright laws over software while Microsoft does and has to pay money for codecs per install.
Oddly enough, microsoft decided that. They are also apart of the group that owns the license to it, which includes apple and sony.
Windows supports something other than BMP?
You used to be able to open an heic in the native windows 11 photo viewer and go to “save as” and resave it as a jpg, but they removed it. So I guess its deliberate.
So Apple?
WebP has all the functionality of jpg, gif, and png with better compression ratios.
can’t store images larger than 16,383 x 16,383 pixels
and how many images are above 16k x 16k pixels?
If you have an optimisation for 99% of all online images, then that’s dope - You can use more niche or older compressions for your very high pixel files
At these resolutions, I’d rather use OpenEXR or TIFF, because it’s very likely something beyond usual photography or casual internet pictures, such as astronomical/medical imagery or 3D scene imagery/textures, both of which benefit from multichannel and full precision multilayer capabilities due to being likely a composition of different wavelengths for the first or different aspects/passes for a 3D scene (diffuse light, roughness, emissive light, etc).
As someone who has edited videos and had to convert WebPs every time I accidentally downloaded them, no they do not.
Translation: your video editor sucks.
Have you ever edited a video or are you just talking out your ass? Really doesn’t matter, he said they had the same functionality, they do not. It had no problem at all with other image formats.
It’s made by Google, that’s enough.
It was only ever an issue for me back when it was new and next to nothing supported it yet.
That isn’t the case anymore, except maybe here on Lemmy where by default, animated images don’t properly upload. Doesn’t even matter the format; webp, gif, mp4, etc. They don’t work out of the box here; they embed fine if hosted elsewhere, tho.
WebM works with image-rs (as long as you don’t exceed your home instance’s upload size limits).
I can’t guarantee that every client can view it properly — that’s on the client’s author — but it’ll show up in the Lemmy Web UI.
$ wget https://gnuplotting.org/figs/bessel.gif $ ffmpeg -i bessel.gif bessel.webmTry downloading that and then uploading it in a comment to to your own instance; it should work unless pawb.social limits the size.
webp will always be funny to me because it was made exclusively by Google to reduce lossy file size for faster HTTP transfer, but then when JPEGXL was released with better lossy compression and the ability to load graphical data progressively by quality instead of line by line bitstream, Google switched to AVIF instead and doubled down on even more lossy compression because they just want to save cloud costs and don’t care about image quality.
AVIF has a lossless mode. Although nobody cares for it, the slightly lossy is fine. It’s adjustable just like JPEG is adjustable.
Also, it’s really annoying to convert since ffmpeg can’t do it yet, but the two major browsers support AV1 video, with alpha, in a .avif that you can shove into an <img> tag. It’s basically just a video. But animated. And transparent. It also works on Discord web now (but not mobile). AND you can set repetition count, if you really want. Can’t show the masterpiece I’ve made before with that since it would be way out of topic, although here’s an HD example with the animation from here:
Ironically, the creators of the damn browser didn’t know that it’s possible and used a .webm. Well, the bourgeoisie division of the organization that makes the browser, of course. The @redhat.com emails, lol. Also, the metadata for the .webm says “ezgif”. Oh welp. And yes, the greenscreen leaking at the edges was already there.
Command (bourne shell):
ffmpeg -c:v libvpx-vp9 -i pop-up-1480.webm -strict -1 -f yuv4mpegpipe -pix_fmt yuva444p - | avifenc --stdin pop-up-1480.avif(-c:v needed to get ffmpeg to read the transparency).File size:
.webm: 540KiB
.avif: 486KiB
.gif: 6.2MiBGIF command used for comparison:
gifski pop-up-1480.webm -H 832 -r 33.3333333333333333333333 -Q 100 --extra -o pop-up-1480.gif, 100% to match original quality somewhatspoiler
It also supports HDR. In year 2060, when the @redhat.com people finally get HDR out for everyone, we will have lazer eye “”“gifs”“”
spoiler spoiler
Users of custom clients and netsurf (via custom frontend) and such will be complaining about this just like about OP’s repost is complaining about WebP.
Google has NIH Syndrome.
Why are we sending someone to “Extra Hell” for making an improved image format that has better compression and is an overall improvement over all 3 of the existing formats it replaces (jpeg, png, gif)?
Shouldn’t this apply to
everyonethe companies who refused to adopt it, thus breaking every normal image workflow? (Same thing can be said about JXL)Edit: fix vague wording
It’s not an improvement over PNG.
but it has an optional lossless mode that no one uses
No one uses it and even if they did, you’d never know since there isn’t a .webl or .webpl to differentiate lossless.
You know a PNG in lossless, you know a jpg is lossy. webp should just be assumed lossy 100% of the time.
Kind of a tangent, but while the png format uses lossless compression, you do not know that the .png you have in front of you is lossless from the filename; image softwares can and do support preprocessing an image with lossy algorithms to improve the file size.
This is sort of unlike flac for audio – it is technically also possible, but hardly anyone would do it, since the only reason to use flac is for lossless compression.
I get the impression that .png is used alongside .jpg as a general image format, although i don’t really know.
You also don’t know if your .png file has an alpha channel or not – might have been made without one.
Because it’s Google trying to control not just everything ELSE about the internet, as if that wasn’t enough, but even what image formats we use.
If PNG and JPEG aren’t good enough, which they often are, by the way, JPEG XL is right there.
– Frost
Because they have a poor user experience with an OS and applications that have chosen not to support it properly, and blame the image format for this
I’d say the knowledge about webp’s benefits is not mainstream at all, I learned about it last week from a random YouTube video. So when people download a file that isn’t working as expected they don’t know who to be mad at so they make memes like this.
I have comments about your first question, but they’re mostly stupid on my end. I think the problem for most is related to your 2nd question. Google is doing it’s google thing where they do a lot to force adoption with a goal of doing nothing to support it. Combine with a general distrust of Google.
I’m realizing my wording might be vague, by “everyone” I meant the big tech companies that didn’t implement it, like Google, Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe. AFAIK most of the open source apps actually implemented support pretty quickly, and obviously it wouldn’t be the end users’ fault because they can’t change what formats are supported
Webp has shit application support. Even Google won’t support it for half their workspace apps.
I having not encounters a single program that couldn’t handle webp. Window, Linux and android. All browsers, all image viewers and editing software I use just works™ with it
I envy you, not having to deal with enterprise and Legal software on a day to day basis.
Photoshop didn’t for a surprisingly long time.
How to determine if webp is lossless? Old format easy, jpg vs. png.
As an expert in image processing:
.png supports pretty extreme compression, while a jpeg can also be lossless. The extensions tell you nothing except which family of algorithms was used to encode/compress/store them.
Webp though, webp is only used for the internet. I mean, you could use it other places, I guess.
You’re an “expert in image processing” but don’t understand the fundamental difference between the .jpg and .png image formats or the encoding and compression algorithms underpinning them? I find that doubtful.
.png only compresses efficiently when used as intended, which is for screenshots or other images with large areas of solid colors, where each pixel is most likely the same color value as its neighbors. In this use case, it’s much more efficient than .jpg. However, .jpg is much more efficient than .png when it’s used as it’s intended; encoding images of the real world, like images taken with a digital camera, where each pixel has a slightly different color value than the ones next to it.
You can test this yourself by taking a picture with your phone’s camera, then copying the image, converting the copy to the other file format, then comparing the file sizes. Next, repeat the process with a screenshot of a web page or a simple Paint drawing. You’ll see that the camera image is smaller as a .jpg but the screenshot is smaller as a .png.
Nothing the other guy said contradicts this? Nor shows a lack of understanding this?
Yeah they didn’t say anything about efficiency lol, where the hell did all that come from
Maybe the commenter got lost looking for a Wendy’s
png also compresses better when you lower the color depth, the number of colors. And you forgot png has alpha which is a big deal IMO.
… What was ever wrong about webp? As far as I know it gives slightly better compression than jpg at similar quality
The biggest issue AFAIK has been that certain OS vendors didn’t allow their users to enjoy it while the internet went on to use a new tool, so they got a lot of broken images
That is your vendors fault, not webp
It’s developed by google, and google having a lead in something usually isn’t a good thing. They might just make up their own extensions and stuff, and other browsers will just have to deal with this. Just like they do with other web standards.
?format=jpeg
Pin that to your clipboard
Skill issue
Use it with FoundryVTT all the time, its great for reducing size without losing much quality.
literally the first thing i do when logging into lemmy via alexandrite - settings, uncheck load images as webp
