|
|
|
|
|
|
by CharlesW
1049 days ago
|
|
|
> It's a Jedi mind trick. All compression is. :^) The additional twist is that our eyes/brains do a great job at glossing over compression artifacts that we're used to. When you expand the image, you can change the formats on both sides for A/B testing. Comparing "JPEG - 20.7 kB" to "AVIF - 18.2 kB" is an enlightening like-vs-like size comparison. I'd be happy to do an AVIF encode of a large uncompressed/losslessly compressed image that meets your "near visually lossless" bar. I'm assuming that JPEG must do better in comparison to AVIF at large file sizes, but I can't find good examples of this. |
|
|
You can't extrapolate that comparison to higher bitrates though - so unless your use case doesn't require preserving image detail (i.e. the images might as well not be there), both formats are inadequate at that size.