(no title)
gaazoh
|
2 years ago
The inclusion of QOI in the lossless benchmarks made me smile. It's a basically irrelevant format, that isn't supported by default by any general-public software, that aims to be just OK, not even good, yet it has a spot on one of these charts (non-photographic encoding). Neat.
shdon|2 years ago
Not something a consumer knowingly uses, but also not quite irrelevant either.
JyrkiAlakuijala|2 years ago
pornel|2 years ago
bz2 is obsolete. It’s very slow, and not that good at compressing. zstd and lzma beat it on both compression and speed at the same time.
QOI’s only selling point is simplicity of implementation that doesn’t require a complex decompressor. Addition of bz2 completely defeats that. QOI’s poorly compressed data inside another compressor may even make overall compression worse. It could heve been a raw bitmap or a PNG with gzip replaced with zstd.
unknown|2 years ago
[deleted]
lifthrasiir|2 years ago
gaazoh|2 years ago
I don't believe QOI will ever have any sort of real-world practical use, but that's quite OK and I love it for it has made me and plenty of others look into binary file formats and compression and demystify it, and look further into it. I wrote a fully functional streaming codec for QOI, and it has taught me many things, and started me on other projects, either working with more complex file formats or thinking about how to improve upon QOI. I would probably never have gotten to this point if I tried the same thing starting with any other format, as they are at least an order of magnitude more complex, even for the simple ones.
phoboslab|2 years ago
Also, curious that they only benchmarked QOI for "non-photographic images (manga)", where QOI fares quite badly because it doesn't have palleted mode. QOI does much better with photos.