Jpeg XL - Format Support

[eWeinhold]

Hi there,
i would really love to see Jpeg XL support in all affinity products especially Photo.

best Regards
Elmar

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPEG_XL
https://jpeg.org/jpegxl/

https://gitlab.com/wg1/jpeg-xl
 

[Ron P.]

Interesting, I can see where web designers would want this new jpeg technology, especially where it is imperative today to provide access for the various devices, desktop/laptop, smartphones, tablets ect. If I understand it correctly, one jpeg-xl image needs to be stored, it then can provide for the proper scale, resolution image for the devices it needs to be displayed on? That sure beats having to store numerous images of various sizes/resolutions, and the coding to call up the correct one.

 

[eWeinhold]

https://cloudinary.com/blog/how_jpeg_xl_compares_to_other_image_codecs

An 8bit PNG with alpha that is about 5.500 KB converts to 550 kb without quality loss.

an 16bit 6k PSD with 270MB converts to an jp2000 with 38 MB in *25* seconds!

an 16bit 6k PSD with 270MB converts to an jxl with 2,4 MB in *5* seconds

[Nicram]

Yes, JPEG XL looks superior to other formats, support alpha channel, animation and other features. I would be veeeery happy to see support for that in Affinity Photo! This is the format of the future!

[unnaymed]

Hello,

What about affinity photo developpers?

Does they want to add jpegXL in read and write?

JpegXL is GAME CHANGING, TIFF and PNG >8bit are a joke to work with, it's a waise of size and time.
And jpeg is alway bad for exporting in lossy format.

JPEGXL can remplace ALL file format. The only limitation is for software support. But now windows, xnview and browser support it.
You can go on discord server if you want more technical information: https://discord.gg/CCcjz23G3X

Edited March 2, 2022 by unnaymed
grammar

[fde101]

Sounds great in theory, but none of the major web browsers really support it yet (Chrome, Firefox and Edge have some initial support but it is disabled by default at this time - and this is only on the desktop, not on mobile): https://caniuse.com/jpegxl

I suspect this may be at least in part due to the fact that it wasn't officially standardized until just this past October (several months after the original post in this thread).

Serif has shown some reluctance to support exporting to file formats based on technical merit, but has generally only considered those which are actually being widely used.

[julianv]

I would also like to see JPEG XL (aka JXL) supported. Currently, Affinity Photo has tools for editing HDR/EDR images. But the only supported export formats for HDR files are EXR and Radiance. Neither of those is properly color-managed for static photos. The latest version of Adobe Camera Raw can output JXL, which is a much better, and color-managed photo format. HDR display is the future. I hope it won't take too long before Affinity rises to the challenge.

 

https://gregbenzphotography.com/hdr/

https://people.csail.mit.edu/ericchan/hdr/hdr-jxl.php

 

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/66556528

[Danielcz]

Just added JpegXL images on my website as alternative if support is enabled in a web browser, filesize vs quality is amazing! 

Lossy compression is bit weaker in darker spots (texture detail loss) dont know if i can change ratio of bits distribution (if you bumping quality it still putting too much bits onto bright areas even if its not needed anymore)

can get it here:

https://github.com/libjxl/libjxl/releases/tag/v0.7.0

parameters used via CommandLine:

cjxl.exe imagesample.png imagesample.jxl -e 9 --brotli_effort 11 -q 92

[Danielcz]

On 10/31/2022 at 4:06 PM, LondonSquirrel said:

Looks like you jumped the gun: https://bugs.chromium.org/p/chromium/issues/detail?id=1178058#c84.

yep seen that on jpegxl reddit  hope google stop being stup*d and revert it (maybe later). 

on website i have WebP and fallback JPG version too and showing only best supported by a browser, was thinking about adding AVIF but it was worst compared to WebP or JpegXL and i didnt seen any encoder development for a long time

[julianv]

I have good news, and bad news. Affinity Photo 2.0.0 (just released) can export HDR files in JPEG XL format. The files look terrific when re-opened in Affinity Photo. But, as of today, this is the only app I have found which correctly displays the files. When I drag one of these files into a blank page in Chrome, they look terrible, washed out with clipped highlights.

As far as I know, Google still plans to remove JPEG XL support from Chrome (although they have been inundated with protests from users and developers). I have Mac version 107.0.5304.110, and it still displays HDR JPEG XL files correctly, when I visit Eric Chan's web page. If I download one of Eric's files and open it in Affinity Photo 2, it appears wrong, washed out with clipped highlights. If I drag the same file into a blank Chrome window, it displays correctly, just as it does on his web page.

Eric edited his files in Photoshop and ACR, which now support HDR JPEG XL. So it appears that the JPEG XL files produced by Adobe and Affinity are different. I don't have the tools, or expertise, to analyze the internal structure of the files. But from looking at metadata, I can see that the Affinity files contain a 16 bit alpha channel, and the Adobe files have a 16 bit padding. Does anyone here have any ideas about what's going on? Here's a sample file from Affinity Photo 2.

20171216_1996.jxl