←back to thread

94 points ksec | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.02s | source
Show context
ekunazanu ◴[] No.44570052[source]
JPEG XL had so much going for it. Kinda sad it was killed off just like that.
replies(7): >>44570077 #>>44570161 #>>44570521 #>>44570580 #>>44570956 #>>44572410 #>>44575108 #
Dwedit ◴[] No.44572410[source]
There's nothing stopping you from using it in your own applications. Just not directly in the browser for now.
replies(1): >>44572598 #
robertoandred ◴[] No.44572598[source]
It works in Safari and is coming to Firefox.
replies(1): >>44585872 #
1. miladyincontrol ◴[] No.44585872{3}[source]
One day possibly firefox, in the meantime I do already have my sites up and running with jxl served to browsers that accept it.

One the oft underlooked benefits of it's progressive decoding implementation is you can just dynamically truncate the bytestream to serve lower res versions, no generation of alternative sizes in advance required.

replies(1): >>44589642 #
2. Dwedit ◴[] No.44589642[source]
I just tested out what happens when you cut off half of a JXL file for two different cases, one in Modular mode, one in VARDCT mode. (The files used were very small, 16KB for the whole file, 8KB for the half file, 10KB for the 5/8 file)

For the Modular file, it failed to partially decode it. This was supposed to be a major feature of FLIF, and it's not working here at all.

For the VARDCT file, it made the top 2/3 clear (looking like a low quality but full resolution image), while the bottom 1/3 was extremely blurry (as if it only had the DC values for the blocks). When I gave it 5/8 of the file, the whole image looked full resolution with no bad blurring, but was still low quality. But roughly the same quality level than what the image would have been if it had been saved at that size.

So it does work for VARDCT files (and you must use the -p switch when saving it), you just need to give it enough bytes. No clue what's going on with the Modular file though.