Can THIS FUCKING DOGSHIT WEBSITE ADOPT WEBP

IF YOU CHANGE ONE THING THIS YEAR MAKE IT SUPPORTING A UNIVERSAL IMAGE FORMAT THAT 90% OF ALL IMAGES ARE REPRESENTED WITH

The person that owns CloudConvert is making bank off of this. This is the only logical reason not to do this

>>105932881 (OP)
Anon go back to somewhere, I don't even know from which pit of hell did you came from desu

>>105932881 (OP)
Webp seems to be insanely controversial these days mostly because of things like jpegli which is why there's probably so much resistance toward adoption of it.

That's one key aspect that a lot of online Webp vs JPG comparisons never show you.

>>105932890
I come from the rest of the internet. Leave your cave.

I'm going to get less polite if some denthead legitimately tries to tell me that webp, an unfeeling, agnostic image format isn't worth adopting. It's not even that JPEG has been outdated since 1998 but that there's a completely arbitrary middleman every single time you want to communicate something through webp, which is 90% of the time.

>>105932929
If jpegli explodes in adoption then practically speaking the usefulness of webp diminishes. Whether that will happen is a complete mystery. What we all do know is that mozjpeg, another JPG encoder bombed pretty hard which is why jpegli was made.

>>105932929
No anon, what the hell is this discord or youtube memer OP image, along with this dumb confident opinion...
Webp isn't worth adopting since it's a file format that hides from user if it's loseless or lossy, most sites sharing images with terrible quality like your pic to economize the most bandwidth as possible
And the reason why 4chan doesn't implement isn't something as silly as CloudConvert making money of it, it's simply because this site is rarely updated

If the image is a webp or i know that downloading it will leave a watermark, I'll just screenshot it. there are always work arounds, anon.

>>105932976
>with terrible quality
Actual benchmarks don't show this, see >>105932922

>>105932922
>>105932881 (OP)
the OP is daiz's bot samefagging

ironically, it emulates its master very well

https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/105901583/#105907602
https://desuarchive.org/g/search/image/gGm3dkPoe_CR3aI2_OxJUQ/

>>105932976
I also forgot to mention that webp has absurd generational loss, meaning if it was truly widespread other the low quality sites you are using, the internet would be doomed with blurry images

>>105932986
It's a trojan horse, it's completely fine if used loseless or lossy max quality, but sites and cdns make sure to use the least amount of quality as possible
I'm not sure if they already fixed, but I never used imgur anymore after they switched to webp, since their images became absurdly blurry

>>105932986
You like to see a lot, Daiz.

https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/104693956/#104713017
https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/98974819/#98974833

>>105933001
Most websites stick to quality 70 (the default) but the source images come from existing JPGs which is why everything turns into diarrhea. This is going to be a problem with any new image format except Jpeg XL but that seems to have poor decode speed at the moment which severely limits its adoption.

Ideally devices would begin encoding WebP images at that default quality 70 setting and websites would then take that file and redistribute it without degrading it further. But maybe this is jus wishful thinking...

>>105932958
I'd take that too.

My opinion on image formats isn't "who gives a fuck", it's just "who gives a fuck" when you get barred from posting because of the near completely arbitrary method of information exchange that you used to post it.

>>105932976
This message brought to you by the website that has had the same washed out lavender gradient since Bush was in office.

Only the finest image formats when posting anime girls with giant jugs and belittling people with egregious racial slurs here.

This includes JPEG where anything with text in it looks like it's melting when it gets saved more than 3 times but discludes WEBP because it allows for the possibility of compression. Tell me when I'm being shafted, don't sugarcoat it.

You are too stupid to have opinions. I have literally nothing else to say to you.

It took Picasso years to paint like he was a master but it took a lifetime for him to say something that is this autistic and 1-dimensional. I literally can't imagine it.

>>105932999
>>105933010
What?

https://desuarchive.org/g/thread/104171134/#104171157

>>105932881 (OP)

>>105932881 (OP)
nope

>>105933025
>Jpeg XL but that seems to have poor decode speed at the moment which severely limits its adoption.
Horseshit
>Ideally devices would begin encoding WebP images at that default quality 70 setting and websites would then take that file and redistribute it without degrading it further. But maybe this is jus wishful thinking...
99% of WebP's in the wild are CDN converted from already 80q or lower JPEGs. It's a format that exists only to deliver even lower quality GIGO lossy-lossy transcoded SHIT.

4chan-xt supports automatic conversion

>>105933312
I mean what do you expect, Webp is an old 2010 codec. Of course it's going to decode faster than jpeg xl. That said Jpeg xl is going to be much better than webp in terms of compression.

Obviously there's trade-offs to be made.

>>105933055
>the webp offered is a lossy recompressed PNG

>SUPPORTING A UNIVERSAL IMAGE FORMAT

>>105932929
No. Refusing to support webp means only competent people can post whatever they want.