[userbinator]

That makes the codec not safe for archiving, only for distribution.

Could you explain what you mean by "not safe for archiving"? The standard is published and there are multiple implementations, some of which are open-source. There is no danger of it being a proprietary format with no publicly available specification.

[dylan604]

Not the GP, but for archiving, you want to know that you'll be able to decode the files well into the future. If you adopt a format that's not well accepted and the code base gets dropped and not maintained so that in the future it is no longer able to be run on modern gear, your archive is worthless.

As a counter, J2K has been well established by the professional market even if your mom doesn't know anything about what it is. It has been standardized by the ISO, so it's not something that will be forgotten about. It's a good tool for the right job. It's also true that not all jobs will be the right ones for that tool

[esafak]

I was not thinking of J2K as being problematic for archiving but these new neural codecs. My point being that performance is only one of the criteria used to evaluate a codec.

[ufocia]

Royalty costs are often the other.