JPEG XL: What It Is And Why You Should Care | The PetaPixel Podcast

[@NotAnotherChannel_Channel]

JPEG XL: same great taste, half the calories.

[@jordanwheatley602]

the summary I needed 🤣

[@louis_sharp]

Brilliant 😂

[@CrushedAsian255]

Easy way to explain that

[@larrychicco1062]

I love hearing these technical experts who are pure direct insight into a topic. Removes all the simplifications of marketing or PR reps who keep trying to sell something.

[@POVwithRC]

The weeks are flying by faster. This podcast seems to come out every day in my world. And I'm not complaining.

[@orphanuprising]

Make sure you're not near any black holes.

[@POVwithRC]

@@orphanuprising only the black hole of advancing age. A most insidious brand of time dilation

[@_rhapsodist]

I had the same impression, madness 🤯

[@testcams]

Chris did a fantastic job on the questions to Jon Sneyers about JPEG XL, directing the discussion to the real-world, practical implications of the format and industry adoption.

[@niccollsvideo]

Hey I appreciate that. Thank you!

[@chuchanchin8901]

A suggestion regarding Jordan’s starter question for the podcast: Maybe just ask the question first, then explain the story behind it? That would give the two time to think about an answer. But either way, always love the out of left field questions from Jordan.

[@beyondpixelation7571]

If social media supported JPEG XL, it would be a quantum leap into standardization. Who knows if that's realistic though.

[@CrushedAsian255]

Biggest problem for this is just Chrome as Chrome based browsers are >75% of browsers. Also I think Facebook supports jpeg xl upload however it just converts it server side back to jpeg / png

[@aarontharris]

As a (retired) former engineer at tech companies such as Facebook or Yahoo, etc -- the JpegXL portion of this video reminds me of work meetings trying to explain technical requirements and value to product managers and designers -- especially when work-remote became a thing.

[@falxonPSN]

To be fair to the gentleman that was speaking, he was definitely at a disadvantage with his English language presentation skills, and is perhaps a little bit more technical of a resource than needed for an interview like this.

[@larrychicco1062]

​@@falxonPSNhis English is perfect, and his grammar is better than average English speaker.

[@aviatorman8]

Totally agree. They should’ve given him the questions days before so he could prep and explain instead of improvising.

[@jeejbeej]

He just explained it very poorly. He could have answered the first question with "the files are smaller and better quality, both for the lossless and lossy images." Instead he went on about technical details which didn't answer the question.

[@blackcloud5157]

They could've just added a simple roundup themselves, after or prior.

[@m29matt]

YESS podcast dropped right as I sat down for lunch! Perfect!

[@LloydSpencer]

Insurance… good reminder. My home insurance were brilliant in 2022. Years ago (2007) a man from the insurance company called in person when I reported a break in. He quickly realised that I was genuine. I explained that a bunch of cameras taken had come from thrift stores / charity shops. But he pointed out my policy included new-for-old. They payout enabled me to buy my first serious (Nikon)camera.

[@MrBenjy2006]

I’ll be curious to see if the new jpeg xl simply takes the place of regular jpegs in the current raw/jpeg workflow. If it writes at the same speed to a card and has better compression, thus better dynamic range and color adjustment for a given write speed and size, it could be all wins. That seems feasible for the nearish future in classic photography workflows.

[@RogerBays]

Thanks for running with my question 👍. The more the photography community talks about jpegXL the better the chance of widespread adoption from camera manufacturers. Personally I think the best first step would be for camera manufacturers to offer JXL as an additional file format. Giving end users the ability to choose which option is best for a particular task. JPEG JXL RAW.

[@fvsch]

My Fujifilm camera already offers to save its non-RAW pictures as either JPEG or HEIF. It would make sense to add JPEG XL as an option there (once hardware encoders are common, so probably in future models, not in a firmware update).

[@petouser]

Unfortunately there is no hardware support for JPEG XL yet. Even so, I think camera makers should give the opportunity to convert RAWs to JPEG XL maybe as batch software encoding after taking pictures. As I understand, JPEG XL can work as a RAW format as well as a format for processed pictures, so there needs to be JPEG XL RAW and JPEG XL processed. Even if it was only software support maybe for reencoding afterwards, it would be a great option for saving SD card storage. If camera makers can put out JPEG XL hardware support, it will be even more amazing, because we will be able to shoot double the pictures on the same buffer. Also AV1 support on cameras for video recorsing would be amazing.

[@RogerBays]

​@@petouserYes, both options👍, which would change the current RAW method too. You mentioned batch conversion after taking images, presumably as a compromise, were you thinking of this being offered in camera or in a standalone app?

[@who2u333]

As far as equipment insurance, I had the 'opportunity' to use insurance for replacement a few years ago. I had no special insurance and my homeowners policy covered it. I now have a Valuable Property Policy that covers my ~$15,000 of gear for about $300/yr. At this point, I am just saving up to have a chunk of money to self-insure.

[@charliewaterman816]

Didn't catch the roll... we've all been there! Definitely a bummer. And sounds like Chris is an exposure machine :)

[@brycepinson8641]

I still have a 90/2.8 Tamron Macro circa 1996 in F mount... It is such a beautiful optic both for macro and portraits.

[@POVwithRC]

Best alien for me Emotionally is the Xenomorph from the only Alien movie of record. The first one. But logically, it's John Carpenter's Thing. I'm going to hide this tape somewhere in case nobody makes it.

[@niccollsvideo]

Oh damn what a great suggestion! Love that alien!

[@MysterDaftGame]

To me it's the mimics in edge of tomorrow ! They look like nothing i've seen before and since !

[@billyoung9538]

Favorite alien design is Beach Ball from John Carpenter's Dark Star. It fit it's role perfectly, and was the initial thing that inspired the creation of the Xenomorphs of Alien.

[@EXkurogane]

Speaking of squids or octopus taking over humans as intelligent life, that's basically Crysis. I do recommend playing the entire trilogy and also the remaster.

[@niccollsvideo]

Played it!

[@DCReels]

Mars Attacks, best aliens 🔫

[@alanp253]

For gear insurance, State Farm is stellar. I had a bunch of gear go for a swim in the North Atlantic. (Iam from the US). When I got home, I called, told the nice lady what gear I lost, and in 15 minutes I had full replacement value wired to my bank account. The coverage is full replacement value for any reason , any place on earth. All for the low, low price of around 100 bucks for 5 grand of gear.

[@goodthiefphoto]

In some cases, home owner's insurance won't cover 'professional' photography equipment if it's used for business purposes.

[@niccollsvideo]

True. Which is why I was out taking family portraits with the phase one ultra wide XC.

[@amateur.photographiemichel6094]

Arrival is a film by Denis Villeneuve a Canadian director from Montréal!

[@trym2121]

Dang, I was thinking to update my camera for HEIF, now we have JPEG XL. Well I'm gonna wait for this one instead then. It's open source so many vendors are going to support it better than HEIF

[@photography_by_mnl]

I immediately thought about the alien Design in Mass Effect and Star Wars😱😍 love those and the reapers are some of the most terrifying enemies in gaming history imo😰 Absolutely loved mass effect and now I absolutely love photography! The JPEG-XL-breakdown was super informative as well! Ty guys!

[@8qetyq5114t]

The alien from Alien and the predator from Predator are rightly two very iconic designs but undoubtedly the crown goes to the thing from John Carpenter's The Thing.

[@senseofeverthing]

Dear Jaron, as someone mainly shooting film I wouldn't necessary recomend using a processor for black and white, but if you have the space, get an enlarger and set up a darkroom. Doing this was one of my best photographic desicions! P.S.: You can check whether the film is moving by looking at whether the film rewind is spinning. This happend to me one when I was new to film and was shooting at a wedding of two friends :-/.

[@ToddPangburn]

To simulate focal lengths on your phone just do the math of 24mm times whatever X zoom the phone says your at. You can also simulate focal lengths IRL with a 24 x 36mm cutout in cardstock held at the focal length's distance in mm away from your eye.

[@es0terra]

Best alien design is in the movie: No One Will Save you Now. On Hulu. I was blown away.

[@AndrewBassonZA]

i have done macro for a long time, sadly in my country insects do not sit around and allow you to do focus stacking, canon can go sniff a fish with that cripple hammer, nice to phase for splitting the things, yaaay prograde jumping into the market with those nice new SSD's, for that lancer 300 backpack how about do a short 5 min movie for it ? nice and cinematic ?

[@michaelbruchas6663]

JPEG 2000 was a compression format that the US Library of Congress bought into - about 20 years. “It was gonna be THE format”! Never heard of it really catching on…

[@CrushedAsian255]

Big problem with 2000: was too slow and patent encumbered. JPEG XL doesn’t have the same problems and already has a decent amount of support in Adobe and Apple’s systems

[@the_wiki9408]

On the iPhone, if you click on the 1x focal length button and then drag your finger, it will show you the focal length multiplier. The 1x is 26mm on my phone, so I can easily do the math on what 75 (2.9x) or 95 (3.7x) is.

[@moltonlava]

Much better intro than last weeks childhood trauma one 😂 Cephalopods rule!

[@JohnDrummondPhoto]

Squids and octopi will not conquer Earth for one reason: they don't live long enough. Only about 2 years at most, which isn't enough to either develop or pass along institutional knowledge.

[@ItsMidasProductions]

It will %100 be corvids or parrots

[@PeterFalkingham]

I've been hoping you guys would chat JPG-XL and AVIF. I've been trying both recently, but I'm finding when i export a jpg-xl from lightroom/camera raw it's always massive, whatever the compression, quality, or colour space settings. I'm also finding jpg-xl isn't recognised by windows AVIF is giving me great image quality, at smaller sizes than jpg, and is recognized by windows (but annoyingly not onedrive) Really annoyingly - after searching online this large file size of jpg-xl doesn't seem to be a problem other people are having

[@Mine18x]

Darktable doesn't allow you to adjust the effort parameter, so you can't make it run slower for a better quality image, overall it seems darktable's implementation of libjxl to be lacking As for viewing JXL images, I would suggest using a third party image viewer that's more powerful than the default one, stuff like ImageGlass, IrfanView, and Nomacs

[@msaunds83]

Star Trek Gorn, great alien design 🤣

[@richardpassavant]

FYI @jerren - the video goes black at 1:25:41 during a speakpipe...

[@iamhassan9943]

Cats. Cats will take over. They have been learning everything and have plans already in place.

[@stevenmuncy491]

A format that could be used throughout the workflow and would allow camera histograms to reflect the actual file data would be welcome.

[@MAP-Designs]

Jordan where did you get that hoodie? Love it! Also awesome work Chris nailing that exposure!

[@johnyoung1606]

Really Enjoy These YT n Podcast :) :) :)

[@DixonLu]

@1:30:00, the old Micro Nikkor 70-180 with the 6T attachment is the only 1:1 zoom macro (I know of). It's huge, no in-lens VR, the D type AF is slow and noisy, totally useless for moving insects.

[@42lanterns]

The app requested to approximate what a lens framing is Viewfinder Mark II. I have it on iPhone and at times have my action button programmed to open the app. You enter the camera body you’re using and the lenses you have and you can see what’s they’ll see. I love it and use it frequently

[@ScottJWaldron]

5:10 Starting off strong with a Gargantia on the verdurous planet mention! 🤝 A great anime though I think the title of the show hindered its popularity.

[@dillank3240]

I was going to say the bald lady from Star Trek: The Motion Picture, but I think I'll say the Gorn. Best. Action. Scene. Ever!

[@joshh6395]

Apps for focal length as well. I’d add Artemis pro, it also has the camera but again for video mainly but pretty much gets you want you want

[@HesselFolkertsma]

I’m going to copypaste my response to John for you in case you also find it helpful: 1:22:41 Hi John, I use the “Mark II Artist’s Viewfinder” app on my iPhone to do exactly what you’ve described. It allows you to also set your image format and save a simulated preview picture. I find this app incredibly handy to spontaneously capture locations and ideas for a later date. For example, I’ll have preset “cameras” saved in the app like the Mamiya6MF with two lenses and two image formats (1:1 and the panoramic option) or a Graflex with different backs (4x5” and Sinar 6x12 rollfilm). It is a paid app, but it is 100% worth it! Hope this helps you.

[@sebastianschmid4506]

JPEG XL sounds promising. I am curious about the DNG wrapper though - does this mean I can use the new compression standard on older editing software? For example - can I open a ProRaw file shot as a JPEG XL on an iPhone 16 Pro (that is saved as a DNG) in Capture One 23 perpetual?

[@fvsch]

Probably not, unless Capture One 23 already supports that or gets updated to support it. The ability to use JPEG XL data in a DNG was added to version 1.7 of the DNG specification, published in June 2023. The dates are one good indication, but even software that supports DNG and is released in 2023 or 2024 may not support DNGs with JPEG XL data if they don't specifically add a JPEG XL decoder. DNG is a pretty versatile format, so "DNG support" is rarely "support for 100% of DNG features". You can see DNG as a container for metadata (like EXIF and XMP) and one or several chunks of image data. The image data may be in one of several formats, including TIFF, JPEG, JPEG XL or RAW data in a variety of formats. A specific piece of software that supports DNG should support reading its metadata, but whether it supports the actual image data within the container is another question.

[@stevenwilson7460]

Favourite film alien design has to be John Carpenter's "The Thing" (1982) hands, talons, tentacles down, just sayin'.😆

[@nevvanclarke9225]

Why did they call an XL for extra large which makes it confusing? It gives the impression that it's giving you more when an actual fact it's giving you less. Why didn't they call it? JPEG SD slim down.... When you use the word XL it gives the impression that you are getting more not less. It's really bad marketing idea ideas when you use the wrong wording ..... I just tested a file and I saved it in JPEG XL and then I posted it online to see if it would precompressed the images better that is a big thing for social media is recompression. A lot of the images look terrible because people trying to upload big file sizes to social media and it doesn't work I'm wondering whether this could be used for social media purposes only.

[@CrushedAsian255]

In the jpeg xl enthusiast server we agree it’s an odd name, the L stands for “long term” as it’s meant to be a long term replacement to jpeg but no one is really sure what the X is for

[@nevvanclarke9225]

@CrushedAsian255 it's stupid marketing 🙄 that they didn't think 🙄...think before you do something 🤔

[@nonononamer]

Jean Jacket from Jordan Peele's "Nope"!! Insane design

[@GemmaHentsch]

I think the centauri, precisely because they’re ostensibly humiform, but at the same time so different, and not just the primary arteries in the wrists…

[@alexanderhartmann7950]

Do you guys have any GAS (gear acquiring syndrome) stuff that you do absolutely not regret buying? I love my Nikkor 200/2 and actually use it regularly. What's your pick?

[@pdp11]

Mark II Artist's Viewfinder can preview arbitrary film formats and focal lengths. I use it for 35mm, medium format, large format, and Polaroid.

[@HakonBroderLund]

1:27:48 Wait, you get a DR hit when cropping in on a full frame sensor? Isn't the sensor performance the same if you crop in or not?

[@TangerineTux]

You get more DR if you aggregate more pixels together (the maximum adds up linearly, but the noise floor, only in quadrature). You therefore get higher DR per fixed fraction of the image (say, one 8-millionth), and hence, more DR if you display the full image and the crop at the same final size. Of course, this is not true if you instead display the crop at a correspondingly smaller size, since that’s basically like applying the same crop to the output image instead of “on the sensor”.

[@HakonBroderLund]

@@TangerineTux as you downscale an image to a smaller image, you have more data from the full frame than the crop and therefore lower noise?

[@TangerineTux]

@@HakonBroderLund Yes (or conversely, if you upscale a smaller image to a larger one, you have less). For example, if you have 100×100 pixels that have each received 400 photons on average, and therefore have 20 photons of noise in standard deviation (SNR = 20, or about 26 dB), and you resize to 50×50, that means roughly averaging over windows of 2×2 pixels. Each resulting “superpixel” will have on average 1600 photons, but only √(20² + 20² + 20² + 20²) = 40 photons of noise, so an SNR of 40, i.e. 32 dB. If you then display those 50×50 pixels at the same size as the 50×50 pixels from a crop, you have better SNR at a given spatial scale. (SNR and DR are not directly the same, but hopefully, this nevertheless conveys the idea.)

[@FAKEROONEY]

I want to see the film exposures. Labs and scanners will adjust exposure to get an average so there's some manipulation in the scanning process. I'm curious to see what they actually look like because the lab could make them all look proper by definition.

[@TomCalton]

ALL HAIL OUR SQUID OVERLORDS! 🦑👑

[@CelsoMollo]

Other the compression why should I use Jpeg XL instead of raw

[@pyroMaximilian]

Are Phase One even aware that for the price of their point-and-shoot, one could buy an entire camera system, I'm talking a flagship body, set of pro zooms, set of fast primes, and a 600/4 for that safari you could still afford?

[@tonn333]

Most likely

[@NeonShores]

The people buying that camera already have more than enough money to do all of the above and far beyond. They're not budget conscious.

[@larrychicco1062]

​@@NeonShoresye its more of the 'I want an every day camera to leave in the glove box of my Bentley' crowd.

[@jdelarosa89]

“The Thing” that’s the winner

[@echoauxgen]

A lot of wind about JPEG AL on cameras BUT in Lrc you can export JPEG or JPEG XL! Then you want to upload to photo posts like SmugMug or ViewBug will they except those edited files?

[@MrGarrych]

I would like you guys to in future podcast explain the appeal of monochrome photography, I just dont get it. Also do monochrome shooters have their TV’s and computer displays set to B&W. Sincerely I am someone who needs monochrome photography explained.

[@peglessebco]

I love the aliens from Attack the Block

[@curtisbme]

That just popped into my head when I was trying to think of non-humanoid aliens that had some unique aspect. Then I immediately thought that it has been a while since I watched it so I am going to remedy that.

[@addylandzaat8080]

Camera support for JPEG XL is irrelevant. At the moment it is iOS only, as long as there is no wide support for Android and Windows it will not succeed. I noticed they announced (limited) JPG XL support on the Samsung S24 months ago - surprised you didn't mention.

[@yuka-youtube]

@@addylandzaat8080 so many rss feed readers can’t load jxl. be cautious new things.

[@deanisplemoni]

Oh JXL. A little less conversation, a little more action.

[@houserhythm]

@Varun with the D780/D850 question: I would strongly suggest you try a more capable mirrorless than the Z6 (like a Z6 III, A7IV, R6 II, if 24mp is enough for you), before you buy a DSLR. The modern eye detect AF is a game changer for shooting wildlife; as is the WYSIWYG viewfinder, faster burst rates, silent shooting that doesn't scare off the most skittish of subjects...

[@korteksvisceralzen2694]

Compression matters especially on high megapixel camera sensors. Shoot 1,000 photos a month jpeg large fine plus raw and tell me you can maintain that level of storage.

[@JurajPadych]

Here we goooo! ❤

[@asub3292]

For more on cephelapods you should read "The Mountain in the Sea" by Ray Nayler

[@catherinegrimes2308]

I do not think that Fujifilm will abandon its RAF format because you can process these files in the camera for the specified film simulation.

[@houserhythm]

I loved the Vorlons and Shadows in Babylon 5. They were completely different - not humanoid, not carbon based... Hate it when aliens are basically just humans with differently shaped heads. The chance is not zero, but practically it would be impossible for a life-form evolved on a different planet to look just like us, breathe the same atmosphere, withstand the same atmospheric pressure, be the same size etc. I didn't mention them first because they aren't exactly aliens, but my favourite let's say intelligent civilisation are the spiders in "Children of Time." I find it truly amazing how well Adrian Tschaikovsky thought through how a spider would evolve towards higher intelligence and didn't anthropomorphize them at all.

[@Granfoss]

Alien. The Alien movies… Just awesome!

[@RollinLeonard]

One time Waka Flocka Flame was visiting Portland Maine for a concert and I saw him and his crew on the street. They were glimmering with gold chains and average height seemed at least 6 foot in the crew. They had absolutely impeccable style. It was quite a contrast to the obnoxiously quaint styling of Portland Maine's downtown. I fell off my skateboard (I'm very soft in the paint) and one of them said, "you ok?" I thought that was nice haha. I was too slow to get tickets. :( Sold out.

[@JayJayYUP]

Nice to see more Macros, but there is a huge divide in terms of designs. Manual macros now go 2:1 - but the autofocus ones are all basically 90mm 1:1 with no Optical Stabilization, and no tripod foot (same with the manual ones). Macro needs tripod feet because you don't want so much front heaviness especially when you're using rails and the camera is sticking out quite far from the tripod. Hopefully this Tamron is the best performing of all the current macros (MTF). And it should be given that the recent Panasonic (L Mount only unfortunately) weighs almost half this lens. Also Sony & First Party Friends need to start updating their macros.. They feel ancient or underperforming at this point.

[@KoenKooi]

The Canon RF one is 1.4:1, has IS and support for a tripod collar.

[@JayJayYUP]

@@KoenKooi Irix 150mm Macro is 1:1 and has a collar, the point isn't to find examples of something like the semi maco RF having a mount. The point is they should all come with collars as an option.

[@ryszb]

Question: are there any AF lenses for mirrorless with a mechanical manual focus ring? I've just bought an Olympus 12/2.0 and was a little surprised that it is focus by wire despite having an MF clutch. To make things worse encoder's resolution is too low and it is impossible to make small adjustments. It is not a motor issue, because it is possible to focus between these "MF steps" using AF. Are all mirrorless lenses like this? Do I have to choose between AF and mechanical MF?

[@GetOffMyyLawn]

I noticed that the Pixel 8 Pro dng files were tagged as jpeg... i was surprised, but it makes sense if it is truly lossless. A video about dng and how it works would be great!

[@JMurph2015]

The Pixel series AFAIK still uses DNGs with true raw underlying data, but there's JPEG bundled inside the file too so that you can get a nice preview.

[@JMurph2015]

Think of a DNG as a weird ZIP file. It has a bunch of different stuff in there, including a preview file that can be one of many different formats. AFAIK Apple is using JXL for that preview, while Pixel is using standard-ish JPEG (although I think that's not quite true either).

[@CrushedAsian255]

@@JMurph2015I think iPhone still uses JPEG for the preview for backwards compatibility and uses JPEG XL for the main payload .

[@TravelerNick]

Did you ask how much this new features is going to cost? One of the reasons jpeg2000 etc have failed is they had a licensing cost. So how much is this stills only feature going to drive up the price of cameras?

[@Anco]

It is open source with no license

[@TravelerNick]

@@Anco Still will cost money to implement. The guest mentioned the need for an encoder chip. Those chips don't even exist. Even if the basic software is free you need to make it work on the camera. Test it.

[@Anco]

@@TravelerNick they also need to test if they update anything, so question is how much more they need to test, also they also now have their own formats they need to maintain. Yeah the chip will cost money, but how much? And it can be more beneficial if more camera makers use the same algorithm, instead of having all their own compression. Which will lead to worse compression or more expensive chips, because there is a smaller market. It can also save money, you can have a smaller buffer for the same amount of photos. Also other benefits as faster transfer of photos, can use smaller cards. Except for the chip, everything would be a one time cost, and the question is if it is more than updating and testing their own codec. So I guess the main question will be, how much will a hardware chip be, and how much do you save compared with the raw compression they use now?

[@ValiRossi]

Best alien ever, Famke Jansen on Star Trek TNG. :)

[@pyroMaximilian]

On an M3 Max MBP, I still notice that 40MP x-trans raw files take substantially longer to import into Lightroom and build previews than 60MP or 100MP bayer raw files from the same shoot, all lossless compressed. And, the computer gets sluggish and unresponsive during the x-trans import, which leads me to believe that Adobe's x-trans demosaicing is running on the CPU while their bayer demosaicing is GPU accelerated. I haven't tested it on other software, hardware, or operating systems, so I can't comment on that.

[@mr_k4tz]

JPEG-xl: I’ve been going through my Lightroom catalog and trying to see which older photos can be processed with modern noise removal tools like DXO and Topaz. The answer is: not many. There was the phase where I only shot Jpg and then the phase when I converted all of my raw files to dng at import. Those files are either unsupported or have limited support in these types of apps. Also, notice that many of the initial questions were asking to compare raw to jpeg-xl. However, the answers were comparing jpg to jpeg-xl. I’d expect that sort of thing from a politician, but the questions remain. Why switch from RAW to JPEG-xL ? Don’t get me wrong, I sometimes shoot jpg only when I want to challenge myself to get it right in camera or when I don’t want to process (street photography for example). But if I’m shooting wildlife or landscape for example, I want to capture as much colour data as possible. Storage is getting cheaper and sensors are able to capture more data. It seems like a waste to throw all of that delicious raw data away.

[@that_mash]

Jon didn't do a great job of explaining this but, in this context, what it boils down to is giving you the same information as existing RAW files but with smaller file sizes, better interoperability, better web sharing and faster encoding/decoding. It's not the same as jpeg, you're not throwing any data away

[@fvsch]

> I’d expect that sort of thing from a politician I suspect it was a miscommunication. The podcast hosts are thinking about JPEG XL as “files” and Jon is thinking about it as an encoding technology. Sometimes they end up talking about the same thing, but sometimes they’re talking past each other a little bit. JPEG XL could be used in cameras in two different ways: 1. as an output format for “developed” images, i.e. as an alternative to JPEG and HEIF; 2. as a compression algorithm in a RAW file (especially for RAW data in a DNG container, as specified in DNG 1.7). If a camera maker does the first thing, then JPEG XL does not replace RAW, it replaces JPEG or HEIF (probably as an in-camera option, like some cameras let you pick between JPEG and HEIF currently). If a camera maker does the second thing, then they are using DNG with JPEG XL compression of RAW data, in which case JPEG XL does not replace RAW files but becomes part of the makeup of the specific RAW files produced by that camera. (Manufacturers could offer an option to save DNG RAW files with JPEG compression, or DNG RAW files with JPEG XL compression; the second option would result in smaller files but lower software compatibility.) A third option, that is maybe confusing things further, is that a DNG file could contain non-raw JPEG XL data, in which case you have a "Linear DNG" file which offers some advantages over a .jxl file (such as setting the white balance in post without quality loss or color shift, I believe), but you probably lose some data and dynamic range compared to a real RAW file. Sadly with image formats it's not as straightforward as "the extension is X, so this file has a specific feature set Y". That makes sense from a technical design point of view, you don't want to invent a thousand different file formats and extensions for every single permutation of features. But for end users, it makes it hard to know what their files can do and what software supports them.

[@JonSneyers]

​@@fvschYes, basically for option 1 you would use lossy JXL at something like distance 1, while for option 2 you'd typically use lossless JXL payloads storing CFA data. For option 3 (which is what Apple's ProRAW does), you can use either lossless or very high quality lossy JXL payloads (distance 0.1 or so). Say for 48 Mpx photos, with option 1 you can get files that are 10 MB in JPEG, 5 MB in HEIC, 4 MB in JXL. With option 2, it would depend on the camera what kind of sizes the RAW files would be, but replacing the payload codec with lossless JXL could probably save 30% or so over lossless JPEG (and of course more compared to uncompressed, which is also an option in DNG). With option 3, you would get files that are 75 MB when using a lossless JPEG payload, 46 MB when using a lossless JXL payload, and 20 MB when using a very high quality lossy JXL payload (using Apple's numbers here). What I think would make the most sense though, is option 4: use lossy JXL at distance 0.3 or so, which would result in files of about 10 MB. This would in my opinion hit a nice sweet spot where the file size is low enough for convenient interchange and to save storage, while the fidelity is still high enough to preserve the dynamic range, allow editing, and make good prints. For the bulk of the use cases, this could replace both RAW and JPEG, since you'd get most of what you want from RAW while keeping the file size similar to what you currently get with JPEG. I think it would substantially simplify photography workflows if you no longer have to think about the choice between shooting RAW vs JPEG (or RAW+JPEG), but you can just always shoot high-fidelity JXL. Essentially option 4 is the same as option 1, except instead of using the better encoding technology to just save bytes while staying within the fidelity limitations of JPEG (and HEIC), you keep the filesize the same but increase the fidelity, allowing to do adjustments in post without suffering from blown up compression artifacts. ProRAW DNG with a lossy JXL payload (as are now available in the iPhone 16 Pro) is a step in that direction, but it still requires software that can handle the complexity of DNG, so in terms of interoperability it's not quite an ideal situation. Using just standard JXL files would be a bit less flexible (DNG does allow you to adjust colors etc without touching the actual payload data, just by adding opcodes and changing metadata) but it would be more interoperable.

[@vidthreenorth4007]

Back around that time, ZIP was also becoming established. LHA was around and growing (and was better than ZIP), but Microsoft froze at the ZIP format and people essentially followed that move. I'm not sure if JPEG might have reached that point. I'd probably need to buy a new monitor and new computer to see the difference (I expect that the support to unpack it would be available). So after all the software upgrading (with possible bug problems) I don't expect to see any difference. And that is only my "main computer". I have a lot of equipment, and some, like old phones, will never get any upgrades.

[@twoblink]

People say Chrome is dropping JpegXL support?? WHY??!?!

[@guyjordan8201]

Best alien is the Horta; our replacement on earth is us in our true form.

[@costagf]

Hope FUJI adds retroactively JPEG XL to all latest FUJIs > X100VI 🤞 because those 40Pix files are HUGE. And Buffer ain't the greatest this would help considerably.

[@JerryFlowersIII]

I don't know why you kept pushing questions about camera makers using the format, it's not his choice, he obviously sees JXL as the better option, that's why it's being made. Camera makers are going to do what they are going to do regardless. His perspective isn't from the camera makers no matter how many times you ask. 58:30 at this point in the conversation it's dissolved from interviewing this man about a new format to venting about how much better the camera workflow could be.

[@johnpavel1913]

But RAW files are not demosaiced. JPEG-XL will be demosaiced, so how can it replace a RAW file? Demosaciing matters -- compare Adobe Camera RAW versus DXO Phottolabs, eg.

[@rasen84]

Adobe dng is already jpegxl.

[@johnbunani1341]

@@rasen84it’s only JPEG XL if using lossy compression in adobe DNG or when you use any modes like Super Resolution, AI Denoise, HDR merge, etc. it’s just a wrapper at the end of the day, which can also house the original raw file

[@rasen84]

@@JMurph2015 jpegxl support as many channels as you want at up to 32 bit precision. You can have two green channels for bayer sensors if you want.

[@TangerineTux]

@@johnbunani1341 Incorrect. DNG also supports lossless JPEG XL compression of still-mosaic data.

[@TangerineTux]

But Apple’s ProRAW is demosaiced anyway (so-called “linear DNG”).

[@awangnurrani8549]

List of real 10 bit panel/screen please?..(not 8bit +)

[@wisedonkey_]

Guys. There is only one correct answer for favorite monster. John Carpenter's The Thing!

[@jordanwheatley602]

So jpeg XL means I can deliver reasonably small file size but lossless without compatibility issues to clients?? Is that right? I just hate delivering lossy files, hence my disappointment with the lack of adoption for HEIC/HEIF....

[@johannweber5185]

You still have to choose between bit-wise lossless compression and high compression factors, but in both cases the compression is better than the one in JPEG.

[@petermac1957]

Chris, as your alter ego Garrett Wang playing Ensign Harry Kim in Star Trek Voyager, I seem to remember you falling in love with several aliens.

[@zcounts]

ppp boys!

[@peterweyland6824]

"Daddy", wow, that really took off fast. also, Hey Daddy 😁

[@fred4859]

5th element

[@theangrymonkey]

Still a bit confused. Does jpeg XL have its own colour space? When I save out from LR I can choose a colour space for jpeg XL but I understood from this that it has its own absolute colour space. Also ProPhoto jpeg xl export in LR is completely messed up at the moment.

[@TangerineTux]

Yes, for lossy JXL, the colour space tag is only informative and doesn’t affect the encoding (which is done in XYB).

[@theangrymonkey]

@@TangerineTux Oh interesting. So does it make any difference at all? ProPhoto colour space is all messed up but sRGB works fine.

[@TangerineTux]

@@theangrymonkey My bad, when exported by Lightroom, it does seem to make a difference because it uses modular mode for ProPhoto instead of VarDCT as with sRGB. Not sure why. They both display fine for me in libjxl’s comparison tool, in Photoshop, and in Affinity Photo, though. What software is it that displays the ProPhoto version wrong?

[@theangrymonkey]

@@TangerineTux no worries. This is all a bit beyond me. The bug happens when exporting to a compressed 16 bit ProPhoto jxl from LR and then viewing the file in LR and anywhere else. You get really weird colour shifting and artefacts. Adobe have acknowledged the issue, though don’t seem to have fixed it

[@gewglesux]

Who's Rudy? Besides i thought that SONY was the MAIN supplier for ALL Sensors?

[@PetaPixel]

petapixel.com/2024/07/15/canon-lays-off-rudy-winston-the-beloved-perennial-camera-guru/

[@gewglesux]

@@PetaPixel Thanks for the link!!! I'll have a read!

[@RTFM70]

Ridley Scott’s Alien has got to be the best by H.R. Giger

[@michaeldittrich2779]

JXL was just thrown out of Firefox and Chrome. The JXL payload in DNG is not supported by Topaz (no AI denoise here) or RawTherapee not to mention DxO's PureRaw 4 (which refuses any image from smartphones).

[@GroovBird]

Are we forgetting that a true RAW format like CR3 contains just the sensor values that still need to be debayered and the color science needs to be applied, which is why these formats are proprietary as the manufacturers spend a lot of money getting this right? Is the white balance baked into the JPEG-XL file?

[@lonerider68]

Sensor values are still compressed via lossless compression under the covers in all RAW formats (hence why they are smaller than TIFF) this talk says that is lossless JPEG codec (even CR3) Replacing that with JPEG XL codec doesn't mean they can't maintain sensor pixel level data.

[@TangerineTux]

If it’s just the sensor values and all other processing still needs to be applied, isn’t that an argument _against_ having the formats themselves be proprietary? You don’t need 47 different formats to store an array of numbers. In fact, that’s why Adobe came up with DNG.

[@lonerider68]

@@TangerineTux Yes that was explicitly asked by the Petapixel team to the JPEG XL as they like using Adobe DNG because they don't need to wait for an update to process RAW from a new camera. JPEGXL guy said that possible although camera companies might want the lock-in for business reasons. It is important to note that JPEG XL is a format *and* a codec (as Adobe DNG container file support JPEG XL internally, as do Apple ProRaw)

[@TangerineTux]

@@lonerider68 The question was mostly rhetorical; I’m a JPEG XL contributor too. 😉

[@JMurph2015]

@@lonerider68 also I think even if they all used JXL, there would still be some lag between getting a prototype camera and having the files "look right" in processing. The big holdup in processing proprietary raw files is getting a proper color profile for ACR, which would still be a problem with JXL just in a different form.

[@MrGarrych]

Just for entertainment sake a toss up between Cylons and Mork from Ork.

[@corykphotography]

My favorite aliens are easily from interstellar 👽👾

[@dwm_hc]

The Elcor.

[@petercofrancesco9812]

15:06 I can think of a reason why... to sell new batteries 🤔Isn't always a sale reason to forget to include a feature or leave a "bug" that escaped years of development?

[@alhOOO2O]

This is the most software architect sounding software architect I’ve ever heard