← Back to context Comment by bitpush 1 day ago If you're transcoding why wont you go to avif or another one? If jpeg -> jpeg-xl uniquely better? 2 comments bitpush Reply pwg 1 day ago JPEG is a lossy format. JPEG -> AVIF adds a second loss operation. JPEG to JPEG-XL is lossless but with a smaller file size. So one does not further degrade the jpegs beyond what they were already degraded in creating them in the first place. Broiler9437 9 hours ago It's a lossless conversion while still saving spaces. You can even convert back to get the exact same file bit-perfect
pwg 1 day ago JPEG is a lossy format. JPEG -> AVIF adds a second loss operation. JPEG to JPEG-XL is lossless but with a smaller file size. So one does not further degrade the jpegs beyond what they were already degraded in creating them in the first place.
Broiler9437 9 hours ago It's a lossless conversion while still saving spaces. You can even convert back to get the exact same file bit-perfect
JPEG is a lossy format. JPEG -> AVIF adds a second loss operation. JPEG to JPEG-XL is lossless but with a smaller file size. So one does not further degrade the jpegs beyond what they were already degraded in creating them in the first place.
It's a lossless conversion while still saving spaces. You can even convert back to get the exact same file bit-perfect