Pls. ad webp to the allowed image format

[Night457]

"not much bloat", I wish more websites would take your advice.

[reptile12]

it's getting better i guess. but I see people ask for help and they have loaded 30 plugins in wordpress and they wonder why their site is slow. in that scenario converting all their jpg to webp should be the last concern.
i just want the old web back with more functionality, search features, with a lot of information up front and imdb's new filtering javascript for person pages is horrible etc.,

[Night457]

30 plugins

Now I have never run a website, but on a similar principle I remember back when Firefox was advertised as infinitely customizable with Add-ons. Eventually I learned this was a bad idea and stripped almost all of them away. Adblockers are essential, everything else not so much.

i just want the old web back

Sorry, it will never happen. Everything will just get worse. That is the law.

imdb's new filtering javascript for person pages is horrible etc.,

Almost everything about IMDB is abominable and actually accessing the information that IS there is difficult. Thank you so much Amazon. All I really want is Film Titles with links, Year, Specifications. Not all those pictures and videos.

[Nasuada]

I made a simple quicktest with an PSD File as source and export it with lossless, lossy and as JPG.

The Result is that one (keep in mind, that the Image who I uploaded is compressed by the upload service, so you will see a bit different result as I see on my screen).

[Image]

So the lossless format of webp taken 652 KB of space and it's looking near the same as the original PSD File. I see only some more stripes and not so smooth transitions from dark to clear blue. The JPG image is taken 240kb of space but the transition from dark blue to clear blue has lot of stripes and is not smooth. In lossy, who taken only 59 KB of space, it's looking a bit smoother as on the JPG, but there are lot of block-artifacts when you zoom in. JPG and Lossy I exported with the same export quality setting in Photoshop.


Around your tips how to handle webp...
I'm a very comfortable person and I hate it, if something need more steps as needed. I'm working under Mac OS and if I create a posting with images, I will do this steps:

1. I search on Google Images the Image and if I got one, I drag and Drop it on a little Clipboard Manager called Yoink. There I can manage them a bit and select them for later
2. If I would select an Image for a posting, I open the tab "Attachments" of the phpBB Editor and Drag & Drop the JPG Image from Yoink on the Button "Select file", than I click upload and done. I didn't prefer external hoster, because a third party hoster can delete stuff or close their service after some time and than all my work is gone away.

So that's are only two steps. If I have a webp format I need to safe it on my computer, open it in a app, select a new format, select the place to safe, hit a button or return, go back to the browser, drag & drop or select the image to upload.

[NRJ]

There is a browser extension you can get, so you have to download webp anymore, it will convert for you.

[reptile12]

30 plugins

Now I have never run a website, but on a similar principle I remember back when Firefox was advertised as infinitely customizable with Add-ons. Eventually I learned this was a bad idea and stripped almost all of them away. Adblockers are essential, everything else not so much.

i just want the old web back

Sorry, it will never happen. Everything will just get worse. That is the law.

imdb's new filtering javascript for person pages is horrible etc.,

Almost everything about IMDB is abominable and actually accessing the information that IS there is difficult. Thank you so much Amazon. All I really want is Film Titles with links, Year, Specifications. Not all those pictures and videos.

I made a simple quicktest with an PSD File as source and export it with lossless, lossy and as JPG.

The Result is that one (keep in mind, that the Image who I uploaded is compressed by the upload service, so you will see a bit different result as I see on my screen).

[Image]

So the lossless format of webp taken 652 KB of space and it's looking near the same as the original PSD File. I see only some more stripes and not so smooth transitions from dark to clear blue. The JPG image is taken 240kb of space but the transition from dark blue to clear blue has lot of stripes and is not smooth. In lossy, who taken only 59 KB of space, it's looking a bit smoother as on the JPG, but there are lot of block-artifacts when you zoom in. JPG and Lossy I exported with the same export quality setting in Photoshop.


Around your tips how to handle webp...
I'm a very comfortable person and I hate it, if something need more steps as needed. I'm working under Mac OS and if I create a posting with images, I will do this steps:

1. I search on Google Images the Image and if I got one, I drag and Drop it on a little Clipboard Manager called Yoink. There I can manage them a bit and select them for later
2. If I would select an Image for a posting, I open the tab "Attachments" of the phpBB Editor and Drag & Drop the JPG Image from Yoink on the Button "Select file", than I click upload and done. I didn't prefer external hoster, because a third party hoster can delete stuff or close their service after some time and than all my work is gone away.

So that's are only two steps. If I have a webp format I need to safe it on my computer, open it in a app, select a new format, select the place to safe, hit a button or return, go back to the browser, drag & drop or select the image to upload.

webp might be or might not be better tecbhnically, but i want compatibility rather than new innovations. i don't want half my images to be jpg/gif/png and then the other half webp or something. if i need lossless i just use png or tiff. jpg works just fine for lossy imo even if it's not perfect compression (no lossy compression is). if someone else feels they want webp on their site than more power to them, i will just convert to png anyway

There is a browser extension you can get, so you have to download webp anymore, it will convert for you.

Ah that's a good tip i didn't look for that

[kal]

Just my 2 cents worth, but to me sounds like another corporation getting greedy, and trying to tie everyone to their systems, of course there will be costs involved at a later stage.

[goku33]

Supposedly webp is a smaller size for same quality than jpg or png. I have not tested that theory. I only use webp when I am looking for images to share on FLM. There are online sites that convert webp to jpg so that is what I use if I want to share the image here. Most of the sites convert from a URL, and then allow you to download the jpg. Just search "convert webp to jpg"

On Linux, if you have ImageMagick installed you can just type in the commandline:.

Code: Select all

convert image.webp converted.png

It’s basically the ffmpeg equivalent for images.

https://imagemagick.org/

Windows GUI (looks Fairly complex to me) https://github.com/TeaM-TL/FotoKilof

[Nasuada]

webp might be or might not be better tecbhnically, but i want compatibility rather than new innovations.

I think we're talking at cross purposes here. My point is not to talk about the advantages and disadvantages of an image standard, but to allow the new format as a suffix in the forum, which is not rocket science, because it is simply a suffix. No script, no programming, no extension.
Technically, every current browser can read this format. This means absolutely no additional effort for the user.
And it's no secret that things change and evolve from time to time, especially on the Internet.

[szijjarto]

Golden rule: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.