https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/
Anyone used the new WebP image format being pushed by Google? I'm all for creating images that use less bandwidth, but none of my image editing software natively handles this format.
That's not a very long list of browsers that'll render it by default.
Also, i wonder how size compares to jpegs reduced to 256 colors?
Astonished. Google want to cut their bandwidth bill by creating a new image format?
I'll stick to the formats I know, trust and use on a daily basis
Quote from: rcjordan on February 08, 2013, 02:50:21 AM
That's not a very long list of browsers that'll render it by default.
Also, i wonder how size compares to jpegs reduced to 256 colors?
Why reduce jpegs to 256 colors? At that point are you usually better off with a PNG?
As for the browser list - how long did it take IE to support PNG with alpha transparency? This could be a long road. If I'm MS or Apple, why do I want to promote a Google-backed format until it actually starts to hurt me in other ways?
Still, the PNG and JPEG algos are pretty old now, so it would be nice to see something better.
>Why reduce jpegs to 256 colors? At that point are you usually better off with a PNG?
I've not been able to beat Lview's 256 with anything. Irfanview doesn't match Lview for this. Ballpark 15% smaller. I tried PNGs a few times but that required another conversion jpg > png if you're working straight from the camera. As I recall, even if I did do the png it wasn't smaller than j256 ...but you might check me on that.