[fao_]

What benefits does this have over PNG, farbfeld, etc. ?

[masklinn]

PNG is a lossless format, it's pretty much pointless for photos. IDK about farbfelt but it seems like a TIFF competitor more than anything else.

This is an (significant) improvement over JPEG.

[fao_]

> a lossless format [is] pretty much pointless for photos

Why is that? Every edit you make to that photo means that the photo will degrade in quality. I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?

[masklinn]

> I always thought JPEG artifacts and compression lossage was a bad thing for photos, not a good thing?

Sure JPEG artefacts are bad, but that can be mitigated (stop compressing so much). Your photos being an order of magnitude larger is worse, and inherent to the way PNG works.

[Dylan16807]

Generation loss is not inherent to lossy compression. The blame lies mostly or entirely on encoders. Here's an example of doing it right:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IheZzcYUV9w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w7vXJbLhTyI

[floatboth]

It's a very good thing when your internet connection is crap.

[thrillgore]

The compromise is that with lossy compression, you can significantly shear the filesize used for retrieval, which granted isn't an issue of speed (but still is for bandwidth consumption).

[agentgt]

If you bothered just navigating the site you would have found this page with a table (table II):

https://nokiatech.github.io/heif/technical.html

[fao_]

A lot of the items on that table really aren't very self-explanatory (Derived image, for example, obviously has a clearly defined meaning in this context, and it appears to be contrary to what I expect it to be). They assume a background that I don't have, and at the moment I don't feel that I have the time to spend obtaining it. I was asking for more of a layperson's comparison of the differences. Read it as "Why should I prefer HEVC over PNG, when they appear to be mostly identical".