made you look
AVIF is generally smaller in size than both WebP and PNG. AVIF supports animation while PNG does not.
The lossless mode in AVIF is so bad that a BMP in a ZIP file produces smaller results.
Which makes sense, as it doesn’t actually have a dedicated lossless mode (like WebP does), the encoder is just to not quantise the video data it produces.
JXL can do lossy images (like JPEG) and lossless ones (like PNG), and on average it’ll produce smaller file sizes than both (While beating JPEG quality wise). The killer feature is that it can do lossless recompression of existing JPEG files and shave off about 20% of the file size, and it’s reversible so you can turn those JXL files back into JPEG images for existing software.
The downside is that it was created by Google Research (among others), but the Chrome team made AVIF instead and decided that’s what they’d support and nothing else.
At least Safari supports it.
Or Automattic doesn’t have enough employees left to implement it
For a community called “technology” there’s a pretty strong anti-AI bubble going on here.
Are you surprised people have opinions about technology, in a community dedicated to discussing technology?
Use Zola or Hugo then
So it depends on the specific HDR encoding used, Rec2020 is the most common ones you’ll see (It’s meant for “pure” setups, i.e. where the source and output are tightly linked, e.g. gaming consoles or blu-ray, or so) and the raw data won’t look great. While something like HLG (Hybrid-Log Gamma) is designed for better fallback (As it’s meant for TV broadcast, where the output device is “whatever TV the user has”), so should just look dimmer.
This is a HDR screenshot I took of Destiny 2, which uses Rec2020, tone mapped to SDR
And here’s the raw screenshot data from before tonemapping.
If the second image had all the right HDR metadata, and the viewer supported it properly, then both images would match.