WebP thread

>>54995820
Same guy?
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S54048281
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53989009
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53962812
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53946774
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53898297
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53873648
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53860113
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53839521
https://rbt.asia/g/thread/S53821437

>>54996779
Nope.

>>54995820
>It's literally the best general purpose format that there can exist for the web.
ha, funny
you can go back to g+ now

>>54997110
Webp is a free format you dumbass. Google gets 0$ if you use it on your website or for distributing photos.

File: png.png (142KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 1000x1000px

>>54997110
oops forgot pic related

>>54997132
kys

Can it do vector?

>>54997297
No but what do you need vector for? Vector is also horrible for drawings and real life photos. Either impossible to use or require like 1 million lines/polygons which would freeze any modern desktop.

>>54997240
>PNG image 1/3 of size of the WebP image
HAHAHAHAHA
WebP SHILLFAG ON SUICIDE WATCH

You can't zoom them in and out

>>54997240
>>54997382
https://my.mixtape.moe/ybzpwg.webp

parameters used:

-lossless -m 6

File size: 131KB (~8% file size reduction).

>>54997487
PNGfags BTFO

What does it matter?

>>54997520
OP just stated all the reasons why you mong.

>>54995820
stop shilling webp already. nobody gives a fuck.

File: png.png (127KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1000x1000px

>>54997487
png 127kb

omg, kill your self now!

>>54997547
I do. Fuck off you stupid mactoddler.

>>54997565
>mac
don't get on a personal level fäm

File: fufsf.png (4MB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1000x1000px

>current year
>not posting massivly oversize png's that takes 5min to load

>>54997487
>>54997562
HAHAHAHA
Someone screenshot this thread so we can continue to BTFO of the WebP fag from here to forth.

>>54997562
You modified that image yet Webp still shits on PNG, please cry some more.

parameters used:

-lossless -m 6

File size: 120KB (~10% file size reduction).

my.mixtape.moe/djfvll.webp

>>54997637
>>54997639
HAHAHAHA
Someone screenshot this thread so we can continue to BTFO of the PNG fags from here to forth.

File: 1465505817669.png (126KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

126KB, 1000x1000px

>>54997562
Why not all the way?

File: png.png (116KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1000x1000px

>>54997639
115kb
you lost even before you started, just mcfucking kill yourself, faggot

>>54995820
how do i make a webm image to trigger applefags?

>>54995820
Can you use a less retarded photo for your test?

>>54997727
Quit modifying the image you retard.

parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 112KB (~4% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/kdvyud.webp

Lossy WebP is worse than JPG in that you can only use 4:2:0 chroma subsampling while JPG can do 4:4:4.

What's the point of using a newer format if it can't even offer the same capabilities as the older more universal ones?

In general the improvements aren't so good that it would be worth the massive loss in general compatibility everywhere. FLIF and BPG are much more interesting as far as new image formats are considered.

File: default.jpg (10KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 1200x630px

>>54997804
webp dis

>>54997832
>4:2:0 chroma subsampling only
That's fucking crap, holy shit.

>>54997727
>"""""""lossless""""""""

>>54997855
Yeah, it is a pretty major drawback.

Lossless WebP uses ARGB so it doesn't suffer from the same issue, but lossy WebP is doomed to suffer from 4:2:0.

File: png.png (110KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1000x1000px

>>54997804
end your life you retard

Is this thread some kind of bizarro nerd Dutch auction or what

>>54997924
no, you're just as much of a fag as OP is.

>>54997880
You got pretty close but PNG is still dogshit compared to Webp. Can you drink more water? Your tears are too salty.

parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 108KB (~2% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/agohuw.webp

>>54998016
PNG on immediate suicide watch!

Doesn't matter, just use BPG already.
HEVC is better than all vpx crap.
Also, is just a .js and that's it, no need to ask for browser official support.

File: CLIA6If.png (751KB, 655x926px) Image search: [Google]

751KB, 655x926px

>>54998050
at least use something nice to look at webpshill

>>54998084
BPG is a meme format with no support on any web browsers. Webp is already supported on Chrome and it's derivatives + pale moon.

Sadly it won't get adopted ever. We'll have to wait for Webp 2.0.

>>54998098
Nice cup size.
1000 ml?

File: png.png (108KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1000x1000px

>>54998016
>>54998050
why wont you just kys? its easy and you save some money on food

>>54998139
you know your cup sizes.

>>54998098
k

parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 547KB (~27% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/qhgxfl.webp

File: 741.png (346KB, 1350x964px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 1350x964px

>>54995820
I think if mootykins was still around he'd implement it, the way he did with webm.
Meanwhile, we have hiroshima nagasaki here

>>54998186
point for you. Now that i have your attention...

you still owe me >>54997836

>>54998129
> is already supported on Chrome
WOOOOW
Tell me one thing that was developed for web by Jewggle that is not support on his on botnet, boy
BPG can be supported using js, its the free web - no need to wait for "official support", fucking cucko

File: png2.png (248KB, 655x926px) Image search: [Google]

248KB, 655x926px

>>54998186
lel are you even trying?
just end it all

File: Screen Shot 2016-06-09 at 23.38.09.png (112KB, 1050x728px) Image search: [Google]

112KB, 1050x728px

>>54995820
does this answer your question?? not everybody is using chromebot

File: Webp_stronk.png (35KB, 734x503px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 734x503px

>>54998144
That all you got fag?

parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 110,382 bytes (~0.4% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/dwmzzl.webp

File: 1465503617860.webm (40KB, 735x1088px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 735x1088px

>>54996968
HEY PUDDING MAN

File: newmeme.jpg (210KB, 489x500px) Image search: [Google]

210KB, 489x500px

>>54998339
>(~0.4% file size reduction)
0.4% 0.4% 0.4% 0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%
0.4%

HAHAHAHAHA

>>54998210
I wanted to spare you the humiliation but k.

parameters used: -q 0 -m 6
File size: 1.47KB (~85% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/lsisbw.webp

Does webp support transparency?

>>54998466
yup. OP LITERALLY mentioned that.

>>54998446
>curiosity
>humiliating
okay then autismo

File: 1439074350908.jpg (31KB, 318x322px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 318x322px

>>54998420

>>54998339
>~0.4% file size reduction
WoW what a game changer!!!!

File: png.png (103KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

103KB, 1000x1000px

>>54998339
wew lad
kys, really, just do it

>>54998224
parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 235KB (~6% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/pbjozu.webp

:^)

>>54998597
you're losing a lot of color in the blush areas and starting to get banding there

File: 1452813743296.png (54KB, 332x413px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 332x413px

>>54998597
Aren't you getting tired of being BTFO?

parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 101KB (~2% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/ymiqzp.webp

>webp literally fighting over less than a 1% reduction in file size

>>54998688
He's probably being paid to shill PNG for whatever odd reason.

>>54998706
How many iterations did you need to get to this filesize, and how much time did it take, by the way?

How can i view this shit on android?

>>54998709
Here's the thing: he modified his images to suit PNG as much as possible. Because of that he ruined the image with color banding and dithering.

In reality most PNG images from a raw source (ie not modified to be PNG compression friendly) will usually be 1.25-1.50X bigger than a Webp image compressed with lossless compression and a -m value of 6.

>>54997879
Nobody cares you retarded piece of shit. Stop shitting in every thread with your completely irrelevant non-issue.

So other than a minuscule reduction in file size and no compatibility, what else does webp have to offer?

File: png.png (101KB, 1000x1000px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 1000x1000px

>>54998706
lol, i sense an incoming 0.4%
why havent you kys yet?

>>54998741
>How many iterations did you need to get to this filesize
1 single encode with cwebp 0.5.0 provided on the google webp pre-compiled tools section website.

>and how much time did it take, by the way?
like 2 seconds despite the parameter -m 6 being used.

stop posting anime, faggots

>>54998809
>Here's the thing: he is trying to modify 4chan to suit Google Chrome as much as possible. Because of that he ruined the image board with shilling and faggotery.
ftfy
>0.4%

>>54998832
applefags cannot view

>>54998847
Lossless means that you are not supposed to reduce the color depth you idiot.

>>54998878
Downloading google Chrome right now. Forefox is shit anyway.

File: They_never_learn.png (34KB, 735x502px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 735x502px

>>54998847
parameters used: -lossless -m 6
File size: 102,668 bytes (~0.99% file size reduction).

https://my.mixtape.moe/nsytct.webp

Good job you dumbass, now my file size reduction jumped to ~0.99%.

>>54998917
Even with all these hacks Webp still manages to beat him in compression although the difference is pretty small, it's still there

>>54998878
Downloading opera right now.

Isn't firefox like full of feminists and SJWs now?

brave browser supports webp

File: laughingatyou.jpg (37KB, 540x360px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 540x360px

>>54999002
>jumped to ~0.99%
>0.4%
>>jumped to ~0.99%
>>0.4%
>>>jumped to ~0.99%
>>>0.4%

My sides!

>>54999073
That's sad that a runaway dev from cuckzilla can make a better browser than all the devs forced to currently work with cuckzilla.

>>54999099
>being this buttblasted

File: 1428283974421-2.gif (2MB, 286x400px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 286x400px

>>54998349
shut up nerd
mfw people like ritsu

File: laughingwhore.jpg (30KB, 620x413px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 620x413px

>>54999121
>enjoying getting cucked into Chrome

webp also works in qutebrowser (my new favorite browser)

File: 1457823319933.jpg (24KB, 480x590px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 480x590px

>>54999189
>getting cucked into firefox is a better alternative

File: as.webm (62KB, 905x1280px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 905x1280px

>>54999160
goddammit pudding man
your choice in waifus is poor

What do iFags currently see with webm?

File: 1463345942087.jpg (2MB, 4083x5967px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 4083x5967px

>>54999211
shut up nerd

>>54995820
>having a 1mb connection in 2016

hi guys I smell bad and mio is the best

File: 1463345942087.webm (143KB, 1401x2048px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 1401x2048px

>>54999231
>tfw you can already hack Webms to act like Webp
>tfw 4chan cucks us to a Webm res of 2048x2048

Webm file size: 143KB
File size reduction: ~94%

File: 1465511956252.webm (107KB, 1026x1500px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 1026x1500px

>>54999258
>>54999231

mio is a needy
needy!

File: kekinghard.jpg (247KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

247KB, 1920x1080px

>>54999206
>only Chrome and Firefox exist
>between the two, Chrome is the right choice
I think I'm about pee my pants!

i wish i was as pretty and cool as mio senpai desu
ritsu is lame

>>54999307
whoops, beat to it senpai haha

File: 1465437931580.jpg (14KB, 238x192px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 238x192px

When is 4chan adding FLIF support?

File: ritsu.webm (39KB, 690x690px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 690x690px

>>54999321
>this desperate
anon pls go i think your waifu turned into pudding again

>>54999307
>0.4%

>>54999396
>>54999301
>94%

File: loli_cake_monster_ebin.webm (479KB, 2048x1414px) Image search: [Google]

479KB, 2048x1414px

.BAT scripts for those interested in making static webms to act like Webp images before 4chan adopts Webp (hope it's soon)

PNG:

for %%f IN (*.png) do (
ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "%%~nf.png" -an -c:v libvpx -qmin 16 -qmax 16 -quality best -threads 4 -t 2 -r 1  "%%~nf.webm"
)

JPG:

for %%f IN (*.jpg) do (
ffmpeg -loop 1 -i "%%~nf.jpg" -an -c:v libvpx -qmin 16 -qmax 16 -quality best -threads 4 -t 2 -r 1  "%%~nf.webm"
)

We future now

I don't understand why PNG continues to be shilled when WebP has demonstrably higher compression in lossless mode.

Do they do it for free?

>>54999320
>he supports SJWs

Just download Chromium already if you want Chrome stability + freedum

>>54999425
He probably used lossy encoding. I bet the image looks like shit.

File: 1465254967935.jpg (156KB, 653x430px) Image search: [Google]

156KB, 653x430px

>>54999427
>Advocating lossy transcodes from jpg

Kill yourself.

>>54999350
When it's TODO list is empty and hell freezes over.

>>54999452
yet it manages to look better than jpeg

>>54999456
kek this

RIP in peace FLUF

i wish ritsu was more like mio, also she stinks at drums

>>54999438
No, Google pays us the same as the WebP fags, this "discussion" is only to "raise awareness" of WebP (Streisand effect).

>0.4% -> 0.99%

>>54999438
It has some drawbacks like high CPU usage and not being able to zoom. Also it's a snowflake format that almost no program support yet.

>>54999452
Source was a 6.25MB PNG you tard. Webm is only 579KB. Of course it lost a small bit of quality but overall lools the same as the original PNG.

>>54999491
i hate to admit that i chuckled
but still
>running a tripgen just to shitpost

don't be in denial, your waifu is pudding

>>54999518
you should switch to mio I'm no good and my feet smell bad

>>54999523
puddipuddi

miomio
I wish our band was 5 mios that would be good

File: 1465278238518.jpg (30KB, 720x438px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 720x438px

>>54999487
Do you also transcode MP3s to FLAC for "improved quality"?

>>54999515
Wow you're retarded, learn to read.

>>54999500
>0.4% -> 0.99%
You do realize that in most cases irl Webp will be 25-50% smaller compared to a typical PNG right? Not everyone knows about PNG super compression tools and nobody likes lossy PNG compression.

>>54999427
Kill yourself, you fucking autist.

File: ipeed.jpg (14KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 480x360px

>>54999441
>my homemade non-public web browser is SJWware
That's it, you owe me a new set of sides, some boxers and pants!

best girl here to remind u that mio is also best girl

>>54999567
No, now go spread my autism all over 4chan until hiroshima gets a clue. Remember that applefags have trouble opening WebMS and cannot save them to post on 4chan on their pissphones.

>>54999545
imagine if vocaroo used FLAC
imagine if people uploaded 3MB jpegs

>>54999570
>reading comprehension

>>54997562

compare 1465505817669.png 1465504675491.png compare.png

So you mean using lossy compression will give you smaller file-sizes than lossless compression?

Who would have thought?

why doesn't firefox support webp

File: 1465281630138.jpg (359KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

359KB, 800x800px

>not encoding your images as a 1fps DivX .avi file

top kek, look at all you plebs

File: wut.png (3KB, 399x71px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 399x71px

>>54999607

>>54999607
the thing you listen to when you open the link, not the thing you can download it as

>>54999607
>>54999724

>>54999697
Because firefox is too busy removing the term "slave" from code.

File: 683538.gif (994KB, 500x295px) Image search: [Google]

994KB, 500x295px

>>54999657
>being cuckolded

>>54999764
Stupid GIFposter.

File: image.jpg (316KB, 1536x1536px) Image search: [Google]

316KB, 1536x1536px

>>54999764

File: 683538.webm (169KB, 500x295px) Image search: [Google]

169KB, 500x295px

>>54999764
>using a GIF in 2016

>>54999815
doesnt look any better

File: 9dc.gif (4MB, 576x324px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 576x324px

>>54997631
>1996
>pictures took 5min to load
>2016
>pictures still take 5min to load

>>54995820

Because it sucks.

https://blog.mozilla.org/research/2013/10/17/studying-lossy-image-compression-efficiency/

https://blog.mozilla.org/research/2014/07/15/mozilla-advances-jpeg-encoding-with-mozjpeg-2-0/

>>54997631
kek

Why did JPEG2000 never catch on outside of cinemas?

>>54999832
>2013
>2014
How much is mozilla paying you?

>>54999868

>I'd rather trust Jewgle than Mozilla

Wow, spoken like a true pajeet!

How much is Google paying you, WebP shill?

File: 1465285075564.jpg (133KB, 776x678px) Image search: [Google]

133KB, 776x678px

>>54999868
>Mozilla
>Being able to afford shills

Top kek, they had to cram firefox full of shitty adware because they're so FINISHED & BANKRUPT.

>>54995820
>link to a .png
kys retard

>>54998214
>Tell me one thing that was developed for web by Jewggle that is not support on his on botnet, boy
Dart, amusingly enough.

>>54998235
Nearly 70% of everyone is good enough.
With FireFox slowly becoming Chrome 2.0, it won't matter soon anyways.

"Everyone" not being able to use it didn't stop them from adding WebM, by the way.

>>54998466
Both Lossless AND Lossy transparency, too.

>>54999427
Strangely, 4chan doesn't even support WebM to use VP9, otherwise we could have lossless WebMs.

>>54998214
>BPG can be supported using js
enjoy waiting 5 minutes to decode an image

File: lel.png (34KB, 592x436px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 592x436px

>>54999724
>not having a GreaseMonkey script to play the OGG version using the browser native player

>>54999850
Pretty much and it didn't save enough space to warrant change to it. I think it only saved like 20% over the ancient 1992 JPG.

What is the Opus of image codecs?

>>54999923
>lossy transparency
wtf, really?

xd

>>54999966
Depends.

>actually fucking finished
BPG

>still in fucking alpha development
FLIF

Both are memes btw, they don't save much space over Webp and have little to no support. Also BPG demands you pay a royalty fee to use it so it's DOA.

>>54995820
No one gives a shit about your waifu artifacting faggot.
Just use png, all modern anime uses flat bland bucket color suited to it anyway.

File: image_1.jpg (241KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

241KB, 1280x720px

>>55000019
shiiiiiieeeeeet

>>55000011
What I meant was a lossy codec that was able to look/sound good at stupidly low bitrates.

Is JPEG92 really the best lossy image codec out today? If so, that's quite embarrassing.

>>54999968
Yes. You can even make the quality level for the alpha channel different than the rest of the image.

So it's possible to make your RGB channels lossless, and have lossy transparency.

>>54999966
FLIF

>>55000031
>just use an inferior format
Who cares about progress anyway, we should all still be using PNG in 2050 amirite?

>>55000064
Dam that sounds like fucking witchcraft desu. I'm liking webp.

>>55000092
no one is going to use webp in 2017, so...

>>55000125
ebay and other websites are already using Webp.

>>55000092
Webp is a solution for the jpg problem, it is not a replacement for png.
Lossless is lossless, lossy is lossy.

>>55000221
Webp has lossless encoding and saves 25-50% over typical PNGs.

>>55000221
Are you mentally and physically retarded?

>>55000221
>Webp is a solution
>jpg problem
What problem, the problem that it works on everything under the sun including toasters and potatoes?

>>55000251
good argument

>>55000263
https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/gallery2#side-by-side_comparison

>>55000292
meatspin.com

Why aren't you retards supporting Webp? It's open source and has no royalty fees. /g/ is a fucking disgrace.

>>55000124
Fuck, looks like I made a mistake.
Only lossy compression lets you change the quality of the alpha channel

So

cwebp -q 100 -alpha_q 50 image.png -o image.webp

works, but

cwebp -lossless -m 6 -alpha_q 50 image.png -o image.webp

ignores the -alpha_q parameter completely.

Wonder if they'll change that.

>>55000354
Hello firecuck user.

>>55000371
http://caniuse.com/#feat=webp

>>55000382
hello r-e-d-d-i-t

>>55000375
How close is -q 100 to lossless quality? Can you tell the difference between a -lossless and -q 100 Webp?

>>55000393
Nigga that's 70% of all internet users. Webp is also supported on Pale moon, Chromenium, Brave, and fuckload of other open sores web browsers for all the freetards out there.

>>55000458
its still leaving out at least 30% of users
>nigga
>>>/b/

>>55000496
Sorry, *nigger

Anyway we all adopted Webms despite that some users would not be able to see them. We'll do the same for Webp.

>>55000518
at least webm is supported by firefox

firefox is known as being more ""privacy-oriented"" than chrome so its probably even more popular among all the pedophiles and terrorists on 4chan

File: 1421291856549.png (152KB, 1045x580px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 1045x580px

>>55000582
Not really, firefox is a botnet too (thanks to SJWs). The only real privacy oriented browser is brave.

Because Safari, Firefox, IE, and most image viewers don't support it. It's also an untested format that may have vulnerabilities.

File: dice.png (216KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 800x600px

>>55000411
Here's some examples.
I probably just have bad eyes, but I don't see any visible differences, until you start lowering the Alpha quality to around 50. But I imagine some images could probably go lower, if the transparency doesn't need to be too precise.

-lossless -m 6 -q 100

(Lossless. The -q here affects compression)
https://my.mixtape.moe/kmjmru.webp (149.7 KB)

-q 100 (Lossy)
https://my.mixtape.moe/fcpmat.webp (87.4 KB)

-q 100 -alpha_q 75

(Lossy, with Alpha quality 75)
https://my.mixtape.moe/ovowsb.webp (80.6 KB)

-q 100 -alpha_q 50

(Lossy, with Alpha quality 50)
https://my.mixtape.moe/vlbyxp.webp (66.6 KB)

>>55000637
see >>55000458 and >>55000613

It's been developed since 2010 and is open source. It's pretty safe to say that it has little to no vulnerabilities.

>>55000458
>Nigga that's 70% of all internet users.
There are 27 million unique visitors to 4chan in a month. 30% of that is 8.1 million. It's likely even worse when you consider how many people are using things like Firefox or Safari (namely on iOS)

>>55000679
That doesn't change the fact that practically the only people who would be able to use it are Chrome users.

>>55000669
lol, this autistic fuck still hasnt killed himself

>0 . 4 %
>.
>4
>%

srly kys

>>55000716
shut the fuck up also that's not me

>>55000716
>still shilling PNG when it's inferior and proprietary

Kill yourself.

>>55000716
I'm not that guy, you idiot.
I just decided to test how the lossy alpha fares.

Also kill yourself.

>>55000738
>PNG
>proprietary
chose one summerfag

>still shilling PNG
do you have any idea how cringe you sound? do the world a favor and kill yourself right now

>>55000735
>that's not me
why did u reply then? (you) are not (you)?
ask mommy for (you)r autism pills

The fuck is up with this autistic samefag determined to stall progress?

Christ I bet he downloads movies in DivX too.

>>55000815
>progress
>webm
kek

>downloads movies in DivX
hi summer friend

>he
oh boy

>>55000701
And:
>brave users
>palemoon users
>chromenium users
>and many other chrome derivatives

File: 3255.png (325KB, 585x1008px) Image search: [Google]

325KB, 585x1008px

a lossless file is a fixed size regardless of format
its just fucking pixel data, have you absolute retards ever opened a bmp or jpg in a hex editor?

if googles tech uses less pixel data then it isnt lossless, please consider killing yourself you dumb shills

>>55000850
We're talking about WebP you mong.

File: Untitled.png (187KB, 1560x442px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1560x442px

It's official then.

>>55000860
So combined less than 1% of users. Got it.

>>55000876
this HAS to be bait

>>55000876
Bitmaps aren't lossless. Do you know what the term "lossless" even means? What do you think isn't being lost?

>>55000887
kek

>>55000850
Post titties

>>55000876
Retard.

>>55000896
>current thread content
>summer is near
it might not be, anon

File: kuromad.gif (855KB, 512x287px) Image search: [Google]

855KB, 512x287px

>>55000876
but that's not how it fucking works

>>55000876
You almost got a laugh out of me.
Here's your (you)

File: nwyTMLm.jpg (63KB, 625x800px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 625x800px

>>55000876
>>55000888

>>55000939
Are you going to argue that the browsers you listed have around 34 million users? That's about 1% of the online population.

>>55000000

File: 1.webm (30KB, 1560x442px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 1560x442px

>>55000887
Fixed.

>>55000981
Fuck off, what does this have to do with meme formats?

>>55000896
>>55000907
>>55000915
>>55000926
>>55000931
>>55000939

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lossless_compression


were you guys dropped by the same nurse? seems like your brain didnt fully develop

>>54998200
Hiro's good in my books because he finally created a /quest/ board to clean up the shithole that is /tg/.

>>55001031
erin troles, gonna post it on r/4chan, etc.

I've never quite been able to understand the existence of lossless compression. How can any form of compression be lossless? You're literally losing data when you compress the file, that's why the size goes down.

I just can't wrap my head around it.

>>55001031
Kek
Next you'll tell me that a ZIP is lossy.

File: 01f.jpg (335KB, 676x485px) Image search: [Google]

335KB, 676x485px

>>55001031

>>54997339
>Vector is horrible for drawings
R-right...

>>55001071
100000000000000000000
1*10^20

Both of these notations are the exact same data. No data is lost. But one of them says the exact same information with less key strokes.

Promptly go kill yourself.

>>55001071
Imagine you had a 1000x1000 image. The image is black on one half and white on the opposite half, split across the middle. You could map every single pixel with a value like #ffffff and #000000, but that would be a huge waste of space. You know you only have two colors, so you can reduce the mapping to 1 and 0. You also know that the two colors are in large blocks, so you don't even need to map every pixel, the image can just instruct the image viewer to fill in black (0) starting with the first pixel until the first pixel in the bottom half of the image, which is then filled in with white (1).
That's an extreme simplification, but the general idea is the same; You're finding patterns in the data and reducing the actual patterns in such a way that you can just recreate the data when you need it.

>>55001159
>Telling people to go kill themselves when you can't even explain lossless IMAGE compression correctly
When did /v/ come on this board?

File: Hand_with_Reflecting_Sphere.jpg (61KB, 397x595px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 397x595px

>>55001125
Vectorize this drawing, you fucking retard.

>>55001186
Anon, are you retarded? He doesn't understand what compression is to begin with, so of course I have to use an example that a retard would understand.

>>55001187
Yes, drawings are known for being realistic.
Not even the person you responded to. You're brain dead though.

>>55001071
dont listen to the moronic shills that attack my posts

For PNG or any other lossless compression method
Imagine that the image is a pile of blocks. The image is complete when the blocks is in a pile.

But when you compress the image to carefully place the blocks on top of each other so they take less space.

And when you want to display the image you quickly put all the blocks in a pile again showing the complete image.

>>55001186
You think the reyarded anon he was responding has the mental capacity to understand how lossless compression like -crf 0 H264 or -lossless Webp works? Anon had to dumb it down and simplify it as much as he could. Even then, retard anon might not be able to grasp the concept that some lossless compression methods results in smaller file sizes compared to other lossless compression methods.

File: delusions of a madman.png (79KB, 1119x608px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1119x608px

>>55000887
>>55001015
>

>>55001251
>trying this hard
>finally managed to trivialize webp's compression superiority after botching your PNG file 15 times and basically turning it into a lossy file

Maximum kek.

No amount of shitposting will stop progress, boy. Enjoy using your shitty outdated formats while they list because it's over buddy.

>>55001270
enjoy falling for googles latest scheme with malicious imageformats that ping google when opened

>>
>webp cant handle edge cases
>Maximum kek.
>shitty outdated format
>it's over
hope they are paying you well for that worded autism display

>>55001211
Reducing large numbers to their exponents isn't a retard explanation, it's a RETARDED explanation. How would someone who doesn't understand lossy compression link reducing large numbers into exponents with images?
If you're going to be hostile you should at least actually show you have some idea what you're talking about. For all we know your knowledge of compression ends with what you posted.

>>55001250
I love how people on /g/ overuse the term "retard" to act like they have any kind of actual knowledge. Did you just get here from /v/? Maybe you came from Reddit. We all think you're so knowledgeable and cool for shitting up threads with useless posts though.

If you edit and save a jpg in photoshop or paint has it been re-encoded?

>>55001321
DEPENDS ON THE SOFTWARE NUMBNUTS

>>55001321
modern editors only recode the changes (if possible). i think even the mspaint version in win7 does that, xp does not

>>55001329
>photoshop or paint

File: 0193829373938.gif (298KB, 300x199px) Image search: [Google]

298KB, 300x199px

>>55001270
>>trying this hard
>>finally managed to trivialize webp's compression superiority after botching your PNG file 15 times and basically turning it into a lossy file
This. I'm laughing my ass off at how retarded and autistic he is. I know I'm on /g/ but this is something else.

>>54999002
>>54998847
>>54998706
>>54998597
>>54998339
>>54998144
>>54998016
Holy shit.
This right here? This is autism. Not 4chan "lel autistic XDD" autism, no. This is legitimate, medical grade autism. This is what mothers everywhere fear when they find out they're pregnant. This is what gets put up for adoption because parents "aren't ready for this type of responsibility". This is what midwest American idiots think comes as a result of vaccination. This is what kills families. This is what kids think of when they hear "slow". This is fucking autism.

>>55001296
Webp is open source. I demand you retroactively abort yourself.

>>55001365
Everyone has already agreed that the autist is you, PNGfag. Just give up already.

>>55001372
look at the posts i've quoted you giant dullard
go fuck yourself autist
both the webp fag and the png fag are fucking autistic

>>55001386
>using and testing technology makes you autistic
Fuck off you retard.

>>55001321
Yes actually. Directly downloading the file (Like when you right click, and "Save As") won't do anything to the file.
But if you just paste it into Paint or Photoshop, it's likely to re-encode the image, even if you try using the same settings (probably).

>>55001369
>open source
You don't think that means anything, do you? This is /g/, no one looks at the source code to verify whether or not a decoder actually phones home.

>>55001405
>my dick is smaller
>NO my dick is smaller

pure fucking unadulterated autism

>>55001409
Well since you don't care about image codecs, you should be glad to leave the thread immediately.

>>55001405
lol webp faggot, we get it, you want to sound intelligent and important and so you go to a forum like this and find some other jizzbag like you who just writes the same shit over and over again to have a debate so that someone can finally listen and hear your point of view because everybody who comes across you isn't interested. You're not smart, you're not interesting, you're an unemployed dullard who uses 4chan to get the attention he doesnt get at home.

>>55001421
don't reply to me again you autistic waste of bandwidth

>>55001406
>>open source
>You don't think that means anything, do you? This is /g/, no one looks at the source code to verify whether or not a decoder actually phones home.
I have. I've yet to find anything there that contacts google. You should review it too and let us know if you find anything.

https://chromium.googlesource.com/webm/libwebp/

Actually being serious here, it's good to know if google is fucking us in the ass in some way with Webp, you never know.

>>55001427
.

>>54995820
Is it ACTUALLY lossless?

>>55001372
>PNGfag
He quoted both guys? What are you on about?

i wonder whos behind the webp shilling

i mean us normal people who sit on fiber and tbs of storage prefer reliable and useful formats such as png even if it costs us a couple of kbs.


Are you actually broke pajeets with 16gb chromebooks on 3g with a monthly 1gb datacap?

File: hqdefault.jpg (13KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 480x360px

>>55001427

>>55001447
Agreed tbqh.

I don't know why these indian poorfaggots need FLAC for lossless music, PCM does me just fine.

>>55001439
Yes. Lossless WebP encoding uses RGBA encoding, no 420 yuv BS.

Does WebP support bt.2020?

>>54995820
>bitching about file sizes in the low single-digit megabytes
Seriously, who gives a fuck?
I post here from a fucking Pentium II almost daily and I have no problem handling PNG and JPG images posted here, the same hardware will choke with your shitty single-frame WebMs you keep posting everywhere.

>>55001434
I've done a shallow look through the source, but I don't think I'm skilled enough to make sense of a large-scale project, or whatever it is a codec is.

My point was that /g/ has made me realize that I can take FireFox 22's source, add some botnet features that are borderline malware, include in the license that I have the right to use the information gathered however I like, and /g/ will gobble it up without question, because none of them are likely to even look at the source.

There are people who actually review Open Source code, but the majority of /g/ (myself included) are just on a bandwagon without actually knowing where they're going. And then they pretend like they regularly review code for themselves, and make baseless claims.

>>55001447
Everyone is shilling it and with reason, smaller file sizes and the ability to use a single format for PNG, JPG, and GIF uses while having a lower file size is good for everyone.

This may not mean much for 100-400KB JPG/PNG images but it makes a huge difference when you start dealing with 4K-8K res images. Instead of web servers having to serve you 20-40MB PNG/JPG images they can serve you 5-10MB Webp images instead. You have to remember that while you may have a 100-500Mbps connection web servers cannot serve you content at 100-500Mbps. Most are limited to 4-8Mbps for economical and stability reasons so Webp would improve loading times on ALL connections, not just pajeet's 8kbps internet connection.

4K monitors/TVs are becoming very popular and phones are starting to get 4K res screens as well (see Sony Z5 premium).

>>55001500
this guy gets it, these shitty webms clog up the place, this webp guy thinks that a single byte difference makes people give a shit about his special snowflake weeb shit.

>>55001500
So why are you in the thread if you don't care?

Don't enter any WebP threads in the future. Continue using PNG as always, since you're happy with it.

>>55001500
>>55001522
see >>55001515

>>55001515
>20-40MB PNG/JPG
>5-10MB Webp

cant you read? fucking 0.4% !!!

>>55001491
no, cause no cie 1931 color space
its a dead format from the get-go

>>55001568
see >>55001270

This thread has made me truly realize just how absolutely infested with normie retards /g/ is. This level of aversion to technological progress is actually sickening.

Thankfully, everything that goes on here is inconsequential so superior image formats will take over regardless. Enjoy shitposting to no avail you retarded dogs.

>>55001575
see >>55001427

>>55001578
>waaah why will no one use my special snowflake google format
fuck off shill

>0.4%
>technological progress

>>55001578
b-but anon, webp has no improvement over jpg or png

>>55001597
Your deprecated formats from the 90s are going down the shitter buddy and there's nothing you can do to stop it.

Kek.

File: crying-baby-1.jpg (15KB, 635x414px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 635x414px

>>55001596

>>55001597
I think it's pretty impressive that a lossless format still has a 0.4% advantage over a lossy format.

>>55001597
see >>55001270

>>55001620
show me five websites that actively use webp

you don't seem to understand the purpose of widespread standards

>>55001618
see >>55000292

>>55001578
>0.4%
>at the price of googles horsecock

Come back when the source has been audited by a credible codemonkey.

>>55001620
>deprecate binary
your autism is showing

>>55001631
>i think its hot seeing my wife getting fucked by someone else
ok then

>>55001515
>Everyone is shilling it
No, it's pretty much just you. I wasn't even aware of WebP until you started making threads whining about how many kilobytes it saves turning an image into a bloated, lossy webm.

>This may not mean much for 100-400KB JPG/PNG images but it makes a huge difference when you start dealing with 4K-8K res images.
This website already servers tons of bloated cell phone camera shots every day, and guess what, it's no shittier than it has always been.

Besides, there is no logical reason for the majority of content posted outside of places like >>>/hr/ and >>>/w/ to be in fucking 4K/8K resolutions, stop being retarded to justify your shitty autistic fantasies.

>4K monitors/TVs are becoming very popular and phones are starting to get 4K res screens as well (see Sony Z5 premium).
What a retarded, baseless claim. The market is not reflected by a few vocal hipsters in /bst/ threads.

>>55001523
>that hurts my feelings! why are you here???? just leave if you don't like my shitty posts!
You're annoying as shit, and /g/ isn't your personal echo chamber. Go to Reddit if you want everyone to suck your dick for crying over an extra megabyte.

>>55001531
>>55001575
>>55001596
>>55001640
>>55001652
>run out of actual arguments
>just backquote the shitty arguments that have already been picked apart
Priceless.
Grand.

>>55001662
>just backquote the shitty arguments that have already been picked apart

But they're backquoting the argument that completely obliterated yours for the entirety of the thread. You have no credibility kiddo.

>>55001650
ebay is already using Webp you mong. Other websites will follow.

>>55001673
>b-but progress
>b-but a megabyte will be saved
Wow, I feel really obliterated.

>>55001690
i said 5, not one.

>>55001673
see >>55001251

>>55001701
see >>55001427

>>55001701
see >>55001270

>all this talk about lossless encoding

What about lossy shit? How does WebP's lossy mode compare to JPG?

>there aren't even five websites that use webp
>b-but it's ready guys it's the future XD

>>55001715
its shit dont even bother

if webp is so great, why is no one using it?

>>55001731
It's a conspiracy between the normies, iCucks and luddites.

t. OP

>>55001715
it cant handle noise that well so it will never be used in cameras (for photos, which is where jpg excels)
draw your conclusions

>>55001737
>It's a conspiracy
webp autist everyone
probably generation Z as well

>>55001650
>>55001695
YouTube, Facebook, Ebay,

>>55001715
WebP is better. On top of smaller file sizes for relatively the same quality, you have less noticeable artifacts at equivalent compression.

The only issues come when you try to convert a JPEG to WebP, but that's true about any Lossy -> Lossy conversion.

>>55001715
It's crazy good, see the PNG OP linked to mymixtape.moe at the start of the thread. It's at least 50% more efficient in compressing images compared to JPG.

>>55001754
nigga, can you count to fucking 5 or not

>stop making things better! stop it stop it stop it! we should use junk made in the 90s forever!

PNG/JPG fags everyone.

>>55001767
this

>>55001767
>lets welcome a random imageformat with a source nobody has audited from a company that has tainted every piece of software they can

remember picasa?
remember chromium?

oh yeah google turned those into to complete botnets that harvests information

https://blog.mozilla.org/research/2014/07/15/mozilla-advances-jpeg-encoding-with-mozjpeg-2-0/

tl;dr: webp is ass

>>55001767
>webp is better
>old tech is lame
>i use ternary encoding for bitwise representation
>i dont eat anymore, just drink soylent green, the food of the future

File: 1447901885731.jpg (56KB, 342x342px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 342x342px

>yfw the anti-webp fag is a butthurt basement dweller whose thinkpad caught on fire once when he tried opening an image format that wasn't from 1992

These threads make so much more sense when you accept this.

i hope 4chan never implements this garbage

>>55001804
>2014
How much is mozilla paying you? Can I be a paid mozilla shill to, where do I sign up? They spend thousands removing the word "slave" from code, I'm sure they'll give me a good sum to shull mossjaypeg.

>>55001767
>a shitty google format
>that nobody gives a fuck about
>with no native OS support
>no support at all on iShit (which will still exist no matter how hard you shake your crib)
>shilled by an annoying as fuck autist that cries into his keyboard like a baby if you don't suck his dick for being a retarded hipster
>all for a megabyte or two, some solution to a non-existent problem that nobody here gives a fuck about

the best thing about your autistic obsession with "progress" is that you're probably a windows/GNU user posting from a crusty x86 system

>>55001878
great counter argument, google shill
unless you have something interesting to say, refer to >>55001427

>>55001889
see >>55001622

>>55001765
Was listing sites, and then got distracted.

If you want more, there's various obscure sites as well.

But what does it matter if not everyone on the web uses WebP? The only reason it's not supported is because people are timid about not supporting FireFox or IE, or they simply aren't aware of it.

>>55001886
It's quite bizarre how you can write so much in a post yet say nothing at all.

It would be funny to step into an alternate timeline where you were born before 2000 and watch you foam at the mouth in autistic rage as the current standardised image formats replaced what came before. Although it's funny watching the same thing happen to you right now I guess.

>>55001836
>all those flavors available and you chose the saltiest one
wow so butthurt, much nonsense, very shitposting
there is your (you)

>>55001909
or maybe they realised how retarded it is to write a javascript to display either the webp or png depending on browser, i mean thats using almost twice as much space as just having a png that everyone can view

>>55001886
Dam I've never seem someone as butthurt as you. How long will it take to get a diamond if I shove a piece of coal up your ass?

>>55001927
>ad hominem
great post mate, did you come up with that on your own or did your boss help you with that?

>>55001955
There was no ad hominem in that post at all. You're just making yourself look like a little baby, throwing words around you don't understand.

>>55001927
>current standardised image formats
what? jpg and png?
>replaced what came before
what? tiff? bmp? koa? gg? pcp? raw?
>write so much in a post yet say nothing at all
>watch you foam at the mouth in autistic rage
careful with that edge son

>>55001909
>there are sites that use it I just don't care to list them!
I would tell everyone to wrap it up and sage this shit thread to page 11 but it's already been shitposted to the autosage limit.

>>55001927
>[crying and ad hominems] and watch you foam at the mouth in autistic rage as the current standardised image formats replaced what came before [ad hominems continue]
You mean GIF? That's still around and used quite often, my aforementioned Pentium II box has no problem handling newer JPEG and PNG formats with NT4, either, because they were actually accepted standards instead of the latest trendy hipster bullshit from Google.

>>55001947
>dam u mad XD
This is how we know you have nothing left.

>>55001985
>watch you foam at the mouth in autistic rage
>no ad hominem

>>55001985
you are retarded if you actually believe your post was anything but ad hominem. maybe you should look up the definition

>>55002004
That's not ad hominem, fucking retard. That's just a straight-up insult. Again, don't use words you don't understand the meaning of. It makes you look like even more of a retard than you already do by samefagging through this thread.

>>55002004
>>55001999
>>55001955
>>55002013

Samefag.

>>55002018
look up the definition before you embarrass yourself further, gen Zer

File: no.png (8KB, 1165x186px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 1165x186px

>>55002018
>oh shit I'm losing them SAMEFAG SAMEFAG SAMEFAG
No. More than one person thinks you're a fucking hipster retard.

File: Screenshot - 06102016 - 04:04:58 AM.png (15KB, 224x241px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 224x241px

>>55002018

i havent had this much fun on /g/ in ages, thats for sure

File: hehe...jpg (77KB, 798x800px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 798x800px

>>55002050
best thread on /g/ right now

>>55001943
>javascript
Holy shit, do you use jQuery for everything, too?

>>55002050
>>55002061
this

SOMEONE MAKE A NEW THREAD

This feud is too entertaining.

white or black
man or woman
png or wepb

Cant we just get along?

>>55002130
webp general when

>>55002130
Don't encourage this fucktard to shit up the catalog even further with his hipster fantasies.

tldr:

Webp provides a 0.4% smaller filesize than a png with the price of only being usable in googles propriety software as of yet.

>>55002143
containing all that faggotry on a single thread would be fine by me (like /mlp/), as long as they dont continue to shitpost those webm converts and demanding support for something stillborn
>0.4%

>>55002143
This is the first legitimately funny thing to happen on /g/ in ages, don't take this away from me.

>>55002193
>>55002143
god it's going to be glorious when chinkmoot adds webp support and utterly BTFOs you cucks

>>55002225
>thing that will never happen
ha, funny...

>>55002225
he's too busy adding malicious ads everywhere

File: 1310483412100.jpg (34KB, 413x395px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 413x395px

>>55002243
your world is going to come crashing down my boy

>>55002225
Yeah it will be nice not having to filter retards like you. I will literally not be able to see the trash you post.

>>55002225
he can't even properly moderate this site or support webms with sound on every board, why the fuck would he go through all the effort just to make the website unusable for one of his biggest guaranteed ad revenue bases for no reason?