+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Tips and Deals (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Thread: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' (/showthread.php?tid=104199)
Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - Trouble - 09-30-2010
Here are some comparisons. http://code.google.com/speed/webp/gallery.html
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - decay - 09-30-2010
i don't see any difference. the WebP images load much slower.
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - M A V I C - 09-30-2010
decay wrote:
i don't see any difference. the WebP images load much slower.
I see color shift in some, but other than that I think the lack of difference is part of the goal. Same visual quality a lower file size.
How do you figure a smaller image loads more slowly?
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - Manlove - 09-30-2010
M A V I C wrote:
[quote=decay]
i don't see any difference. the WebP images load much slower.
I see color shift in some, but other than that I think the lack of difference is part of the goal. Same visual quality a lower file size.
How do you figure a smaller image loads more slowly?
That happened for me too. As the page loaded, the jpegs were in place whilst the webps were still loading. Some of the ones at the bottom took 10 plus seconds to appear. Then I read the article..."Since browsers do not currently support WebP, we used a PNG container to allow users to see these WebP images in a browser." Which I assume accounts for the slow loading.
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - M A V I C - 10-01-2010
Manlove wrote:
[quote=M A V I C]
[quote=decay]
i don't see any difference. the WebP images load much slower.
I see color shift in some, but other than that I think the lack of difference is part of the goal. Same visual quality a lower file size.
How do you figure a smaller image loads more slowly?
That happened for me too. As the page loaded, the jpegs were in place whilst the webps were still loading. Some of the ones at the bottom took 10 plus seconds to appear. Then I read the article..."Since browsers do not currently support WebP, we used a PNG container to allow users to see these WebP images in a browser." Which I assume accounts for the slow loading.
Exactly.
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - hal - 10-01-2010
I dunno... some of the webp images looked crummy...
and there are a lot of ways to reduce a jpeg - how do we know that they did the best they could?
Big yawn...
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - M A V I C - 10-01-2010
hal wrote:
I dunno... some of the webp images looked crummy...
For example?
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - (vikm) - 10-01-2010
M A V I C wrote:
[quote=hal]
I dunno... some of the webp images looked crummy...
For example?
Is this another question you already know the answer to like above or are you seriously asking this time? If so, maybe he'll answer ya.
Re: Google releases a new image format 'WebP' - M A V I C - 10-01-2010
(vikm) wrote:
[quote=M A V I C]
[quote=hal]
I dunno... some of the webp images looked crummy...
For example?
Is this another question you already know the answer to like above or are you seriously asking this time? If so, maybe he'll answer ya.
I'm seriously asking. I didn't look at the images super closely, but upon first review they looked fine. If there's one that is off, I'd like to take a closer review (eg, screenshot then zoom in in PS...)