you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 11 months ago (4 children)

The name of the format makes me think it's regular jpeg, but bigger. Wouldn't it be better to be smaller? 🤔

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 11 months ago

    No. They increased the max "canvas" size and increased encoding efficiency. You'd want the file size to be smaller but the file itself to be larger (and consequently more detailed)

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 11 months ago*

    In my personal tests of jxl, it manages filesizes 1/9th that of png while remaining visually identical (unless looking VERY closely). It's a massive improvement over jpeg and honestly a replacement for png in most cases.

    Like I'm saying 8MB for a 8000x6000 file at max quality (estimating from memory)

  • source
  • parent