Most pictures you find on the web are still in this old, crappy format that ruins its quality.
How is it that, despite disk space having been the most worthless thing for a decade? The Internet has been fast enough that it doesnt matter anymore for years as well. And people still save their pictures with artifacts?

i honestly like her more than the b2w2 hoe

>>105701963 (OP)
most cameras save as jpg for compression purposes, so thats the only valid use for it in my opinion.
reasons why everything is jpg nowdays is the general lack of undesrtand by everyone on the web about formats, this also effects videos, documents and music. no one seems to care about quality too and most crap online is full of artifacts because theres no quality control of what is being posted, some shithones like 4chan have file limits, a heavy blow on png that has bad compression.

High enough quality jpgs are indistinguishable from PNGs. They serve different purposes, PNGs for transparency and better compression for certain types of images like your anime thot and jpgs for photos.

>>105702080
its annoying bc even though Ive heard jpg is only compressed on the first save and not if you download it agian, every time I see a jpg of a file I already have its a different size, and zooming in, it has more or less artifacts, meaning the file was re-compressed. How come nobody sees any issue with it?

>>105701963 (OP)
>>105702080
It is because it is faster than almost everything while saving space to take more. There are more important applications for imagery than your breakfast at strbucks or cat buttholes.

>>105701963 (OP)
Wait until you hear about lossy .webp

>>105702131
>High enough quality jpgs
yeah, but 99% of jpgs on the web now are rotten. i agree its not jpgs fault its the people sharing trash and doing work on their phones instead of an actual image editor that can handle quality.

>>105701963 (OP)
bandwidth is expensive.

>>105702433
for whom? Also transferring a few pngs is nothing compared to the boatloads of video streams and games people download.

>>105702458
>for whom?
for the site hosting the images you fucking retard
>Also transferring a few pngs is nothing compared to the boatloads of video streams and games people download.
the fuck is that supposed to mean? the average web page has much more images than video streams or video games on it, some stuff uses even more bandwidth so you expect big sites to waste it when it comes to images?
and besides, video streams with modern codecs (but even just good old h264) are way more efficient than a medium res png
a 1080p 30 fps 4 mb video can be more than 20 seconds long if encoded properly, that's equivalent to a single png frame of the same resolution
also, what about performance?
when you are dicking around with your phone in a rural area with 1 mbps internet you don't want to load a web page full of pngs

>>105702080
what this image doesn't show is the line up of stinking cars and mopeds on the square

it's the best format. simple, fast. you don't need more.

>>105701963 (OP)
*monkey's paw curls*
Your pictures are webp now.

>>105702614
not really since it is a small plaza meaning no cars there, but you can walk on the streets just fine, walkability is great with mixed trafic in the small streets.

>>105701963 (OP)
It's an anti-privacy conspiracy. Every time you download a jpeg file, it's compressed again, creating a new copy of the file. When you reuse that file, the hash is the same, differentiating you from others who have the same image, even if it's a very common image. This is why it hasn't died despite being inferior to other formats. They basically use it to track you across the internet.

>>105703001
>>105702146
SHUT IT DOWN

>
>

>>105702725
Wonder what it's like to live in a nice aesthetic place like this
Do you just get used to it or not care if you were born there or is it like Everytime you go outside your like "damn it's pretty out"

it just werks

>>105701963 (OP)
>>105702185
>>105702588
>>105704878
So you're a Jeet or Chink and you're not re**it ty*ing for disk space?

Interesting.

>>105702080
Somewhat agree with this but the REAL reason modern formats haven't gained any traction is because they take an infinitely longer time to encode compared to JPG so all the nerds doing the backend stuff would rather not deal with longer encode times so they use JPG and call it a day.

There does now exist hardware acceleration for AVIF but it costs $10,000 so shit IDK man.

>>105701963 (OP)
ALSO file size does still matter for high traffic websites. Every copy of an image sent to someone takes energy and ultimately $$$ to move from point A to point B so making them as small as most people will tolerate is still a pretty high priority for high traffic websites except for despots like 4chan filled with like 10 real users and hundreds of bots. It's not easy to imagine when it's not you having to do the distribution yourself.

>>105701963 (OP)
I try to use PNG as much as possible, but sometimes I have no choice but to convert an image to JPG because of the tiny filesize limit here
Hell, just a 1440p screenshot of a game is going to be like 6MB

>>105707047
>I try to use PNG as much as possible,
nice of u anon, lets spread the word a make the web great again.

>>105701963 (OP)
stfu faggot, image compression is soul and you can have perfectly clear images by just reducing the compression amount

>>105702080
In simplification:
1. lack of understanding and general unawareness about formats and its use-cases by the general public.
2. lack of quality control alongside dubious tools (mobile editors here) shiting fragmented jpgs all around resulting in a low input of quality [images] across the modern web.
3. bad sites that will contribute to the further shitification of images around; facebook, 4chan and plebbit comes to mind here.

>>105706908
>>105706996
>the retard has returned

>>105706996
>ALSO file size does still matter for high traffic websites. Every copy of an image sent to someone takes energy and ultimately $$$ to move from point A to point B
oh so finally you understand this concept...
so why the fuck are you still advocating for inefficient hardware encoders?
that image you keep copy pasting in every thread now doesn't make any sense because again, it doesn't account for encoding efficiency AT ALL
it's now completely unrelated

>>105706908
>>105706996
why is hardware acceleration all you talk about. i know you're better than this.

>>105707101
>by just reducing the compression amount

>>105706908
>the nerds doing the backend stuff would rather not deal with longer encode times
"nerds"
more like
"people that literally HAVE A JOB and GET PAID TO DO IT"
you're insane
what next? the bus driver doesn't actually drive the bus and just tells people to call an uber because he'd rather not deal with driving the fucking bus? you keep sounding more and more retarded it never ends

>>105707228
>why is hardware acceleration all you talk about
retardation

>>105707077
if you wanted to make the web great you would use webp

>>105701963 (OP)
why use big filesize when little file size do?

>>105707233
kek absolute bot reply there, he even posted the obligatory rotten image

>>105707252
>sneaky trans format
nah im sticking with png for my OC.

>>105707261
you know my body.

>waaaa they just dont know about le superior format
we know, we just dont care
its good enough
you sound like the consoomer drones who always need to buy the latest piece of tech garbage on release when whatever you had already still works completely fine

>>105707217
You're confusing ASICs with FPGAs. I'm talking about the latter, I hoped the $10,000 price tag might have hinted this...

>>105707228
>>105707245
It's really all it boils down to whether you want to admit it or not. Like BESIDES HEIC, tell me what FLIF, FLUF, BPG, and whatever other "next gen" image format that died a slow painful death all had in common.

I'm not saying hardware acceleration is a magic bullet either. The limitations aren't something to brag about.

While average normoloid don't know what jpeg is, big companies like Meta and similar compress data to save space and bandwidth.

>>105707330
>It's really all it boils down to whether you want to admit it or not.
no. you're right. i guess there's not much to discuss about them atm.
>FLIF
>initial release: nine years ago
holy shit.

>>105702185
>yeah, but 99% of jpgs on the web now are rotten.

That's because every fucking social media site where you can upload images, will recompress them. When an image gets reposted often, it will get progressively worse and worse quality with every repost.

Which is why WebP is cancer, since nobody uses it natively, only with frontend plugins that will convert all your jpg uploads to webp.