I read through the .doc, the way I see it they basically took the principle of M/S coding used for stereo audio and adapted it for image coding. The technique is neither new nor high-tech, but Kudos for them for realizing its applicability (no other well-known image format has done it, AFAIK).
However, sadly they not only broke the image format, they also broke the ABI of the library. They could have just introduced new functions for new functionality and upgrade the decoding (keeping the old interface) for the new format. This would have allowed introducing support for the new format gradually, allowing existing software to at least decode the new images. But hey no they just had to break the interface, which I guess also means that libjpeg-9 won't spread wide until most of the existing software are adjusted. Yeah a version bump is normally a good point to break ABI, but reading through the changelog, I just don't see it justified.
This seems to be WebP :) Of course, if it qualifies as a "well-known image format". But apparently Guido Vollbeding from JPEG 9 actually got a bit better implementation for this particular filter: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/m...sg_id=30353476
Originally Posted by ultimA
So indeed, he surely deserves a credit for that and we may end up with better open source image codecs as a result. I just think that JPEG should not be a subject for such experiments. We need a good balance between "stable" (traditional baseline JPEG and PNG formats) and "bleeding edge" (WebP and friends).
About WebP, iirc it was based upon the VP8 video codec. Now with the new VP9 video codec out soon(ish) which as reported has a ton of improvements, has there been any word on WebP being updated/enhanced to make use of those improvements?
Originally Posted by ssvb