"Higher level of compression, smaller file size, and much higher image quality" is saying the same thing in three ways, like saying "the athlete runs quicker, faster and at a higher rate of speed than his opponent". These are all the same metric: a higher quality-to-compression ratio.
Thanks for your comment. I suppose you could argue that level of compression and file size are linked, but image quality is not linked. I.e. At a higher level of compression and thus smaller file size the level of quality is higher with the WebP.
Given the dramatic growth of HD consumer video, it doesn't surprise me that Google is looking for ways to reduce bandwidth demand with a compression technology that has relevance in the video industry. I'm sure a big barrier to Google's ability to making Youtube more profitable is the cost of bandwidth and server horsepower. Sure would be nice if video and static image delivery could use the same compression model - whether that's LAB or YUV, no? One industry might be more nimble than the other, and that may dictate which model is chosen.
i agree with anonymous, and the author's reply misses the "higher quality" point ... if the compression level is higher, then an image compressed to the same size as a JPEG would have higher quality than the JPEG; all three factors are linked
however, after consulting several references (curiously none provided by the author) it seems that WEBP may not really deliver better quality at a given level of compression (it seems to depend how you measure quality), and there are some significant technical limitations to the format
If you didn't find the answer you were looking for on my blog - email me your question ( pritchardgordon @ gmail (dot) com ) and I will try to answer you directly.
If you've arrived here via a Google search - well sometimes it gets confused and lands you on the wrong post so try a search within this blog or check out the topics below.
Translate my blog into your language (click on flag).
Formerly Print Quality Marketing Manager for eleven years at Creo/Kodak. Presented at print technical conferences, trained printers and buyers regarding print quality issues in Europe, N. America, and S.E. Asia. Articles published in trade journals, co-authored TAGA paper on halftone screening, authored BRIDG's guide to halftone screening. Previously Technical Director of Western Canada's largest commercial sheetfed shop. For several years Professor of Digital Graphic Design at Emily Carr University. Former Creative Director at McCann Ericksson Vancouver.
Currently looking for opportunities related to the subjects covered in this blog. Contact me at: pritchardgordon @ gmail (dot) com.
"Higher level of compression, smaller file size, and much higher image quality" is saying the same thing in three ways, like saying "the athlete runs quicker, faster and at a higher rate of speed than his opponent". These are all the same metric: a higher quality-to-compression ratio.
ReplyDeleteHello Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment.
I suppose you could argue that level of compression and file size are linked, but image quality is not linked. I.e. At a higher level of compression and thus smaller file size the level of quality is higher with the WebP.
I will edit the post to make this clearer.
Given the dramatic growth of HD consumer video, it doesn't surprise me that Google is looking for ways to reduce bandwidth demand with a compression technology that has relevance in the video industry. I'm sure a big barrier to Google's ability to making Youtube more profitable is the cost of bandwidth and server horsepower. Sure would be nice if video and static image delivery could use the same compression model - whether that's LAB or YUV, no? One industry might be more nimble than the other, and that may dictate which model is chosen.
ReplyDeletei agree with anonymous, and the author's reply misses the "higher quality" point ... if the compression level is higher, then an image compressed to the same size as a JPEG would have higher quality than the JPEG; all three factors are linked
ReplyDeletehowever, after consulting several references (curiously none provided by the author) it seems that WEBP may not really deliver better quality at a given level of compression (it seems to depend how you measure quality), and there are some significant technical limitations to the format
There are JPEG encoders out there where you can set the compression of Cr and Cb channles seperated to the Y channel.
ReplyDeleteAn example is the SAI paint tool JPEG exporter.