Thursday, September 30, 2010

JPEG Alternative

     In today's world we want everything-and fast. This statement could not be any more true for the web especially. But is it fast enough? For most things we use it for, I would say the answer is probably yes. Still, Google is planning to revolutionize still images on the web with a new format called WebP. Research indicates that this new format could cut image file sizes by 40% compared to a JPEG format. This is important information to users since Google estimates that 65% of bytes on the web are from images. The higher compression efficiency measurement came from a sample of one million images that Google took from the web. About 90% were JPEG and 10% were PNG and GIF. If WebP is well received and adopted by users it will allow for faster file transfers and lower network burden.

     Although this sounds like something that could be useful for making the web faster for users in all aspects, it still faces a lot of challenges. JPEG is probably the most used format, probably because it is often the default format therefore people feel comfortable with it. That isn't going to change overnight. Microsoft has also tried to promote an alternate format (JPEG XR), for years in fact, with little progress. JPEG XR format offers greater dynamic range, a wider range of colors and more efficient compression. However it doesn't receive support aside from native- Internet Explorer and Windows. Google acknowledges that launching WebP will take a lot of effort and promotion.

     Google is taking the first steps by talking to browser makers and trying to get vendors to support WebP. Since Google is a dominant browser and has several other successful webpages they have a good chance of making this a successful and real technology whereas other companies have not been able to. Google plans to release WebP software which will let users convert graphics to WebP images and judge the quality for themselves.


This image has been encoded with WebP. Because browsers can't show WebP natively today, this WebP image actually is displayed here as a PNG graphic that captures the WebP version without changes. In its WebP incarnation, the image is 36,154 bytes.
(Credit: Google)



The same image encoded with JPEG. Its file size is 46,768 bytes.
(Credit: Google)

2 comments:

  1. is it bad that I don't really see a difference?

    ReplyDelete
  2. um i think there is a really slight difference in color but the main reason for it is the small file size so it loads faster.

    ReplyDelete