[X] My Assistant

I wouldn't know if there's technical or financial limitations preventing the integration of two of these formats but i think it would be beneficial to uploaders, users and the server itself by allowing to use smaller sized files. In my testing i've found file sizes to be reduced quite nicely though mostly for large colored images, gradients or halftones don't benefit too much from it, but there's still some size reduction with lossless compression. I think especially with a large amount of pixiv dumps and AI generated images being uploaded, this could save some space for both users downloading (or viewing) and the server itself. It would also help with not having to resize images to fit the file size limit.

Both formats are supported by most modern browsers and image viewers [caniuse.com] webp [caniuse.com] avif (though photoshop needs a plugin to open avif).

Webp is such a cancer really. Hope it won't be implemented tbh.

Webp is such a cancer really. Hope it won't be implemented tbh.

Why not?

webp compatibility outside a browser still sucks. storage concerns aren't really an issue.

Most image viewers can easily open it or edit. I think only default windows viewer can't.

Most image viewers can easily open it or edit. I think only default windows viewer can't.

Correct, also you need to install a custom add on plugin in windows to support it in other programs too. (Maybe this has been added by default in 11, not sure but doesn't seem to.)

I can't think of any reason any uploader would care, they're either ripping from other sites which are jpg/png, or scanning, jpg/png, or translating and exporting jpg/png...

You're looking to save space:
On the server, doesn't matter.
On bandwidth, doesn't matter.
On your own personal machine, you can convert the images into what ever format you want.

This post has been edited by Cipher-kun: Apr 2 2023, 17:24

Correct, also you need to install a custom add on plugin in windows to support it in other programs too. (Maybe this has been added by default in 11, not sure but doesn't seem to.)

I can't think of any reason any uploader would care, they're either ripping from other sites which are jpg/png, or scanning, jpg/png, or translating and exporting jpg/png...

You're looking to save space:
On the server, doesn't matter.
On bandwidth, doesn't matter.
On your own personal machine, you can convert the images into what ever format you want.

Didn't have to install any addons to have it supported in photoshop or affinity or jpegview.

As for uploaders, i had to resize images recently due to the png size being 6mb over the file limit which was a pain in the butt. This gave me an idea that's been with me to give users an option to use image formats with better compression. I'm not saying uploaders will care about it or will suddenly start reuploading stuff from other sites and convert images as well, but i do believe that just having that as an option will result in a benefit. The gallery sizes could get lower which means faster loading times, the torrents could get smaller as well. I'm seeding a lot of torrents and sure, i could go and try and reconvert every single one of them into different formats with better compression, but it'd be easier if the gallery in the first place would be better compressed in the first place.

Didn't have to install any addons to have it supported in photoshop or affinity or jpegview.

Aren't they all third party to begin with? At least assuming the windows 11 program set is similar to 10's. Not really any different to custom add-ons or plugins.

I forget, but aren’t AVIF and WEBP exactly the two image file types that I always have to open with my browser if I’ve saved any of them?

Unless the images are very important to me, I then proceed to take screenshots and preserve the PNGs I thus get.

I’ve used a handful of default and non-default image viewers of different Ubuntu flavors, no luck.

My impression has been that certain sites use AVIF and WEBP in order to discourage downloading. I might be wrong, but that’s really the first thing that comes to mind on my end.

On the other hand, GIMP has native support for creating WebP animations, and Gimp 2.10 no longer has a working APNG creation plugin at all. APNG was always a bodge, funny how people forgot that.

The biggest gains with webp are for animations, because you no longer have to store each frame losslessly if you don't need to or want to.

There are plenty of people on slow internet connections who would benefit from the smaller filesize of webp even if the servers can handle it.

Looking forward to the more efficient, more modern format being added to the galleries.

As for uploaders, i had to resize images recently due to the png size being 6mb over the file limit which was a pain in the butt.

CODE

Accepted Images: JPG < 20 MB, PNG < 50 MB, GIF < 10 MB. Accepted Archive Formats: ZIP. Max Resolution: 20000 x 20000.

huh? your PNG was 56MB?

I forget, but aren’t AVIF and WEBP exactly the two image file types that I always have to open with my browser if I’ve saved any of them?

Yes, those would be the ones.

The biggest gains with webp are for animations, because you no longer have to store each frame losslessly if you don't need to or want to.

For animation webp (or avif I believe supports them too) would be cool, and I believe is already on the forever list of things to be added.

On the other hand, GIMP has native support for creating WebP animations, and Gimp 2.10 no longer has a working APNG creation plugin at all. APNG was always a bodge, funny how people forgot that.

What ever comitte that controlled PNG said no to APNG when people created it because they wanted to make a better animation format with strippers and hookers and shit, and they never did. So it was 'killed' for a long time.
I think the thing that really cause it to be supported by everyone was apple using it for their iMessage stickers

This post has been edited by Cipher-kun: Apr 3 2023, 01:50

Aren't they all third party to begin with? At least assuming the windows 11 program set is similar to 10's. Not really any different to custom add-ons or plugins.

Third party to what? I can't imagine there's someone editing doujins in windows image viewer or something. And linux probably has something as well, like gimp.

I forget, but aren’t AVIF and WEBP exactly the two image file types that I always have to open with my browser if I’ve saved any of them?

Unless the images are very important to me, I then proceed to take screenshots and preserve the PNGs I thus get.

I’ve used a handful of default and non-default image viewers of different Ubuntu flavors, no luck.

My impression has been that certain sites use AVIF and WEBP in order to discourage downloading. I might be wrong, but that’s really the first thing that comes to mind on my end.

I don't use linux myself so i can't really offer and [alternativeto.net] suggestions here. I've been using [github.com] jpegview for win10 forever now and only recently updated it to see if i could handle jpegXL (it did, though not a lot of other programs do it out of the box unfortunately, great compression, even better than webp or avif). But even so, i've never had problem downloading webp files from the net, it just depends on the site i suppose. They would use webp for it's compression and loading speed i imagine. Though most of them don't do lossless compression which ticks me off. Just a few days ago i was getting stickers off telegram and they were in webp format by default and converting them to png increased the size three times. Not a huge deal for just 3mb of weight but for large galleries i think better compression would come in handy.

CODE

Accepted Images: JPG < 20 MB, PNG < 50 MB, GIF < 10 MB. Accepted Archive Formats: ZIP. Max Resolution: 20000 x 20000.

huh? your PNG was 56MB?

Yeah, i think it was around 56 which was pretty irritating because it was just this close to being under the limit. It was at best compression too, nothing could compress it better. I had to reduce the dimensions to hit the size limit and put the full size in the torrent. You can check the gallery here. The photoshop file itself just for this one page clocked out at almost 400 megs so it is a rare occurrence but still, one that could possibly be negated. Jpeg XL and webp managed to compress it to about 51mb. And i still think that smaller file sizes due to different formats would benefit end users in the end, especially hoarders or backupers. Or torrent providers.

Yeah, i think it was around 56 which was pretty irritating because it was just this close to being under the limit. It was at best compression too, nothing could compress it better. Jpeg XL and webp managed to compress it to about 51mb. And i still think that smaller file sizes due to different formats would benefit end users in the end, especially hoarders or backupers. Or torrent providers.

600 DPI full colour cover in PNG will do it I guess. Still it would have been limited by being in the other formats as well, if what you say about it still being 51MB is true. (600 DPI has always felt extremely excessive imo, do you really see a need for it? I've never bothered with above 300 DPI)

I don't disagree with 'the new image formats are better for so many reasons and are the future' but until it's natively supported in users OS, and every program that doesn't support them dies out it's probably still a no go.
Image Libraries often don't support them still, lots of other websites don't support them in their uploaders. It could make further distribution more painful, etc.

It doesn't really gain enough to outweigh users being confused by why their images don't open in 'photo viewer' and having to store both a 'new format webp/avif/jpgxl' and a 'png' on the server to deal with legacy clients, or that issue, outweighs any storage savings.

This post has been edited by Cipher-kun: Apr 3 2023, 18:15

600 DPI full colour cover in PNG will do it I guess. Still it would have been limited by being in the other formats as well, if what you say about it still being 51MB is true. (600 DPI has always felt extremely excessive imo, do you really see a need for it? I've never bothered with above 300 DPI)

I don't disagree with 'the new image formats are better for so many reasons and are the future' but until it's natively supported in users OS, and every program that doesn't support them dies out it's probably still a no go.
Image Libraries often don't support them still, lots of other websites don't support them in their uploaders. It could make further distribution more painful, etc.

It doesn't really gain enough to outweigh users being confused by why their images don't open in 'photo viewer' and having to store both a 'new format webp/avif/jpgxl' and a 'png' on the server to deal with legacy clients, or that issue, outweighs any storage savings.

I didn't adjust DPI because it's always my intention to deliver the best visual quality that i can (unless i mess up, tehe~ (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/tongue.gif) ). Webp isn't a new standard either, it's 12 years old. JpegXL is probably not even a year old, sure, but much like with other video or image extensions it's not going to stick if no one is using it and no one is using it because no one is using it. At least webp is used somewhat so that could be a good start. It's actually weird that microsoft would make Edge support webp but not their default photo viewer. I know jack about linux but i figure if someone can install an operating system, that someone can install a photo viewer. I think that if sites like this allowed the option of these newer standards, i figure people who hoard/download aren't gonna be bothered too much by it (unless they're on an older/default software) and hopefully it'd make other sites/software implement these standards as well. Hell, maybe if nhentai scraped and converted to webp they wouldn't have to resize to ant resolution.

I also checked webp support in Lanraragi and it works there too. I'd go on a converting spree if it didn't mean that would invalidate few thousand torrents i got from EH.

Oh damn, i guess you weren't joking about new features being way overdue

https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?showt...p;#entry3538188
https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?showt...p;#entry5560409
https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?showt...p;#entry4576141
https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?showt...p;#entry4361566
https://forums.e-hentai.org/index.php?showt...p;#entry5994880

Some of these date back to 2014.

I'm all for avif. Lately I've been using it in all my torrents so that my seeding drive fills up slower. Lossless avif seems to usually ends up 20-25% smaller compared to png. I encode my galleries with avifenc and GNU parallel to utilize all threads like so:

CODE

find . -iregex .\*.png -print0 | parallel -0 -j16 avifenc {} -s 3 -l {.}.avif

Lossy can end up extremely small, but I'm not certain what sort of quality loss there is so I haven't used it other than for testing on a couple large gallery torrents.
https://e-hentai.org/gallerytorrents.php?gi...mp;t=9988e45115

At the time of this one, I didn't understand avifenc as well so the quality and efficiency is probably pretty bad:
https://e-hentai.org/gallerytorrents.php?gi...mp;t=0e51d0d674

Assuming your choice of format is based on animated images rather than standard images, it may be a good idea as "animated" is niche enough and unsupported by static image viewers and editors enough for many arguments against it to not work.
The issue is how to enforce that only animations should use these formats. (IMG:[invalid] style_emoticons/default/unsure.gif)

Most of the webp images I've seen look like ass compared to their jpg counterparts.

Here's one great example taken from dlsite (despite being webp, they still retain the jpg version):

[x0.at] https://x0.at/8Kaz.webp vs. [x0.at] https://x0.at/0eJ7.jpg

This post has been edited by Jigsy: Apr 21 2023, 02:44

Most of the webp images I've seen look like ass compared to their jpg counterparts.

Here's one great example taken from dlsite (despite being webp, they still retain the jpg version):

[x0.at] https://x0.at/8Kaz.webp vs. [x0.at] https://x0.at/0eJ7.jpg

A lot of sites used webp as an excuse to absolutly nuke their file size down to nothing and making them look worse in the process. Not really the formats fault, but its what it was sold as, so kinda also is.

I'm all for avif. Lately I've been using it in all my torrents so that my seeding drive fills up slower. Lossless avif seems to usually ends up 20-25% smaller compared to png. I encode my galleries with avifenc and GNU parallel to utilize all threads like so:

CODE

find . -iregex .\*.png -print0 | parallel -0 -j16 avifenc {} -s 3 -l {.}.avif

Lossy can end up extremely small, but I'm not certain what sort of quality loss there is so I haven't used it other than for testing on a couple large gallery torrents.
https://e-hentai.org/gallerytorrents.php?gi...mp;t=9988e45115

At the time of this one, I didn't understand avifenc as well so the quality and efficiency is probably pretty bad:
https://e-hentai.org/gallerytorrents.php?gi...mp;t=0e51d0d674

I would convert most of my torrent archives into something other than png if that didn't mean the torrents would stop being seeded.

Most of the webp images I've seen look like ass compared to their jpg counterparts.

Here's one great example taken from dlsite (despite being webp, they still retain the jpg version):

[x0.at] https://x0.at/8Kaz.webp vs. [x0.at] https://x0.at/0eJ7.jpg

It's about the size. Site managers want the sites to load faster on phones meaning stuff has to be very small. Check the sizes, webp is 10 times smaller than jpeg whilst not being too different in quality (for a phone user anyway).