For regular photographs where some quality loss is acceptable, JPEG can be used, but for medical images you may want to use lossless JPEG 2000. You are supposed to know that PNG works well for line art, but not for photographs. It has slightly improved since then.) Works on any kind of imageįLIF does away with knowing what image format performs the best at any given task. (Note: the graph below is for an early version of FLIF. FLIF clearly beats other image compression algorithms. The results of a compression test similar to the WebP study are shown below. Here are some of the key advantages of FLIF: Best compression The file format has been standardised and versioned.
(or 19% on average, including 16-bit images which are not supported by WebP and BPG). Then FLIF still beats that by 12% on a median corpus 74% smaller than lossless JPEG XR compression.Įven if the best image format was picked out of PNG, JPEG 2000, WebP or BPG for a given image corpus,ĭepending on the type of images (photograph, line art, 8 bit or higher bit depth, etc),.53% smaller than lossless JPEG 2000 compression,.46% smaller than optimized Adam7-interlaced PNG files,.33% smaller than brute-force crushed PNG files (using ZopfliPNG),.FLIF - Free Lossless Image FormatįLIF is a novel lossless image format which outperforms PNG, lossless WebP, lossless BPG, lossless JPEG2000, and lossless JPEG XRĬompression experiments we have performed , Which is based on a combination of Pik and FUIF.įor more information, see Jon's JXL info page or visit the FLIF development has stopped since FLIF is superseded by FUIF and then again by JPEG XL,
0 kommentar(er)
