一位图像压缩工程师发表技术分析，质疑JPEG XL作为网络图像编码标准的适用性1。尽管JPEG XL在技术上先进，但该分析指出其在实际Web应用中相比AVIF并无竞争优势1。作者结论认为JPEG XL不应该成为Web标准，但可在专业工具和设备制造领域发展1。
在压缩效率方面，JPEG XL的无损优势相比WebP仅约11.9%，但这一优势仅适用于小体量的内容1。更为关键的是，在有损压缩效率上，现代AVIF编码器已经超越JPEG XL的参考编码器1。JPEG XL还缺少方向预测模式和环路去块滤波等关键压缩工具1。
性能方面的差距同样明显。JPEG XL的解码时间不具竞争力，某些精心设计的图像可能需要17秒以上的解码时间1。相比之下，AVIF在渐进式解码上表现更优，仅需2-3%的数据就能显示可用图像1。将JPEG重新压缩为JXL虽可节省20%的体积，但解码时间却增加约33%1。这一技术分析回应了JPEG XL在2023年被Chrome拒绝的决定，以及Rust解码器最近开始进入Firefox和Chrome的动向1。
A technical analysis argues that JPEG XL, despite its advanced compression capabilities, lacks practical advantages over competing formats for web image delivery and should not be adopted as a web standard 1. The format was rejected by Chrome in 2023, though Rust decoders have recently begun integration into Firefox and Chrome 1.
The critique identifies several performance shortcomings that undermine JPEG XL's viability for online use. While JPEG XL offers approximately 11.9% lossless compression improvement over WebP, this benefit applies only to small-volume content 1. In lossy compression efficiency, modern AVIF encoders surpass JPEG XL's reference encoder 1. JPEG XL also lacks critical compression tools including directional prediction modes and loop deblocking filters 1. Decoding performance proves problematic, with carefully designed images potentially requiring over 17 seconds to decode 1, whereas AVIF demonstrates superior progressive decoding capabilities, displaying usable images with only 2–3% of total data 1.
The analysis notes that while recompressing JPEG images to JPEG XL yields approximately 20% file size savings, this optimization comes at the cost of roughly 33% longer decoding time 1. Based on these technical findings, the author concludes that JPEG XL may have value in professional imaging tools and device manufacturing sectors, but does not meet the requirements for web standardization 1.
评论
还没有评论，欢迎留下第一条。