I heard about this recently and decided to look into it. Seems neat. When I convert my existing .jpeg images to .jxl, they look identical, but take up only ~60% the space. Windows file explorer and paint dont support it however, but ImageGlass does. Considering converting all my images to .jxl to save on storage space (esp. cloud storage). Thoughts?
7 Comments
Zarxrax@lemmy.world · 29 pts · 2y
Chrome decided not to support it because they want to push AVIF instead. Firefox followed suit. Then Apple actually decided to support JXL. It has a decent amount of support in desktop software. So it's basically fine for personal use, but don't expect to use it on the web unless Google changes their tune.
2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de · 11 pts · 2y
Screw chrome tbh. You can always embed https://github.com/niutech/jxl.js on the page as a fallback decoder for browsers that don’t support it (yet).
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 13 pts · 2y
It's in Firefox but disabled by default.
It's under the about:config settings in Firefox. Search for
image.jxl.enabledand set it totrue.oupson@programming.dev · 9 pts · 2y
Only in nightly unfortunately.
SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone · 10 pts · 2y
It's only enabled by default in nightlies. It's in Firefox stable, just not enabled by default.
Source: I am not using nightlies. I have it enabled in my browser. It's been there for over a year at least.
oupson@programming.dev · 10 pts · 2y
Strangely, I enabled it a year ago and jpegxl.info is still displaying that my navigator does not support jpegxl
2xsaiko@discuss.tchncs.de · 7 pts · 2y
JPEG XL is awesome. I got 1/8 of the size converting (very small, like 800kB) PNGs to lossless JXL.
GIMP can open them I think, but can’t save them. ImageMagick supports it obviously and so does KDE’s image library so I get previews there and whatnot.
It really depends on what you want to use them with imo, if you view them in a specific program and that supports it, go for it.