av1-avif VS jxl.js

The article is about avif not webp. Note the editors for the AOM avif specification don't even include Google https://aomediacodec.github.io/av1-avif/

This reminds me of something similar from the guy who implemented AVIF in Firefox. He gives a talk about the implementation [1] where he talks about the CLAP privacy problem. Basically the spec adds a field that allows for cropping of the image, but the binary file would still contain the original. This would lead users to believe some image data was deleted when it really wasn't. I always thought he spent a lot of time and effort on this for little gain, but now I'm starting to think it was worth his effort.

[1]: https://youtu.be/BUkRlfkv2D8?t=2199

And the related GitHub issue: https://github.com/AOMediaCodec/av1-avif/issues/188

So actually the same images I linked above are in the AOMediaCodec repo as well, under Link-U: https://github.com/AOMediaCodec/av1-avif/tree/master/testFiles/Link-U And I see the same issue with the yuv422 images there as well. I'm guessing Apple's AVIF implementation must be incomplete?

Created by Alliance for Open Media and worked on by Netflix, Microsoft, and Google developers, AVIF is open source - you can even weigh in on image processing and spec issues.

I've been trying to find a way edit 14bit RAW files (.ARW) to an HDR capable format (HEIF/AVIF). In the process I found out there's an official AVIF encoder (1) by AOM that seems like it should be capable of creating HDR PQ stills.

Others samples are available here : https://github.com/AOMediaCodec/av1-avif/tree/master/testFiles/Netflix/avif

AVIF can do something that resembles hierarchical JPEG and that could be useful for progressive decoding: you can have multiple layers/scales, where e.g. first a 1:4 image is encoded, then residuals to get to 1:2, then residuals to get to 1:1. Examples of this were recently added to the AVIF spec: https://github.com/AOMediaCodec/av1-avif/pull/134

> It's so frustrating how the chromium team is ending up as a gatekeeper of the Internet by pick and choosing what gets developed or not.

https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js is based on Chromium tech (Squoosh from GoogleChromeLabs) and provides an opportunity to use JXL with no practical way for Chromium folks to intervene.

Even if that's a suboptimal solution, JXL's benefits supposedly should outweight the cost of integrating that, and yet I haven't seen actual JXL users running to that in droves.

So JXL might not be a good support for your theory: where people could do they still don't. Maybe the format isn't actually that important, it's just a popular meme to rehash.

https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js a javascript polyfill taken from the main page https://jpegxl.info/

There are other decoders [0] written in a "safe language" (rust) listed as well. So no there are many "safe" implementations

[0] https://github.com/tirr-c/jxl-oxide

> If you care about JXL, and only want to support JXL, and you put a JXL in your picture tag, then the browser still won't render it, even if you use a picture tag.

Is this true if you provide a polyfill? Have you tried it and it failed? (Serious question.)

https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js

All of the people here who are so passionate about JPEG-XL will be happy to learn that there's nothing preventing them from using it on their sites right now:

https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js

If you want Chrome to ship with JPEG-XL support, use it. At some point, browser makers will decide it's worth the cost to them and all users to add it.

> Please be aware that some images may not load on this page unless your browser supports JPEG-XL

The site could provide a WebAssembly decoder to make the JPEG-XL images work for everyone.

For example, here's a WebAssembly decoder: https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js

Demo: https://niutech.github.io/jxl.js/

at this point, I'd consider just using a polyfill library to decode jpegxl data client-side, like JXL https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js

:) There are some wasm vs native benchmarks in the context of JPEG XL (for example https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js#benchmark)

For adding JPEG XL support I went with jxl.js which I modified for my use case. After looking through the main file, which is also called jxl.js, I decided I only needed 2 relevant code blocks. The one to decode the image and the one to turn the ImageData into something I could display in my existing codebase (which I already partially had implemented for another use case).

It's easy - you'll get ReferenceError: SharedArrayBuffer is not defined when the COOP and COEP headers are not set. Multithreading is enabled by default if you use the scripts from multithread folder. If only SIMD is supported, it is being used. Oh, and progressive decoding is also enabled by default.