This mainly relates to the Export dialog for Jpegli but may apply to other places, e.g. Save As and information in the Properties dialog.
1. XNView refers to 'JPEG-li' but it should be 'Jpegli' - see https://opensource.googleblog.com/2024/ ... brary.html
2. 'Optimize Huffman' doesn't appear to do anything when used with Jpegli. CLI help says disable Huffman must be used with Progressive level = 0 - could that be the issue?
3. DCT Method does nothing - disable this for Jpegli?
4. Smoothing factor does nothing - disable this for Jpegli?
5. Subsampling factor - the labelling for this is non-standard and inconsistent. Should be 444, 422, 420 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chroma_subsampling + https://kraken.io/docs/chroma-subsampling).
However, better to make this human-friendly? I.E.
High compression (420)
Medium compression (422)
Low compression (440)
No compression (444)
Note: Jpegli allows for these 4 settings even though XNView only exposes 3 (omits 440)
JPEG / Jpegli
Moderators: helmut, XnTriq, xnview
Re: JPEG / Jpegli
Just bumping this with clearer formatting:
Could the JPEG / Jpegli Subsampling be relabelled so that it is human-friendly and uses standard notation - like so:
It's currently non-standard and confusing for users - e.g. then switches to
Plus, please use the correct name for Jpegli - not 'JPEG-li'
Could the JPEG / Jpegli Subsampling be relabelled so that it is human-friendly and uses standard notation - like so:
Code: Select all
High compression (4:2:0)
Medium compression (4:2:2)
Low compression (4:4:0)
No compression (4:4:4)
Code: Select all
'4:2:0 (2x2, 1x1, 1x1) smallest file'
Code: Select all
'...best quality'
Re: JPEG / Jpegli
Chroma subsampling and JPEG sampling factors
Example
There's a great deal of confusion around chroma subsampling notation. Chroma subsampling is generally expressed using J:a:b notation but the meaning of the notation varies between different sources and software. Furthermore, JPEG uses a different format internally which is sometimes exposed in user interfaces. This article attempts to shed some light on the different notations and how they are related.
- chroma subsamplings
in J:a:b notation, eg 4:4:4
- sampling factors
Code: Select all
J:a:b H V Sampling factors 4:4:4 1⁄1 1⁄1 1×1, 1×1, 1×1 4:4:0 1⁄1 1⁄2 1×2, 1×1, 1×1 4:2:2 1⁄2 1⁄1 2×1, 1×1, 1×1 4:2:0 1⁄2 1⁄2 2×2, 1×1, 1×1 4:1:1 1⁄4 1⁄1 4×1, 1×1, 1×1 4:1:0 1⁄4 1⁄2 4×2, 1×1, 1×1
- description
It could be "low, medium, none" (I would not repeat "compression"),
but "smallest file, best quality" are also valid options and clear enough (see examples).
Example
Re: JPEG / Jpegli
The XNView settings do not need to be an exhaustive tutorial on the technicalities of chroma sub-sampling, so using the most common notation of e.g. '4:2:0' is enough for the user to understand what is being applied.
For the average user, they want to know what effect the setting will have - therefore 'compression' is the clearest description. The Export setting could be labelled 'Subsampling compression' then 'High (4:2:0), Medium (4:2:2), Low (4:4:0), None (4:4:4)' - this is consistent and easily understood by all.
> "smallest file, best quality" are also valid options and clear enough
Switching units for the same function is bad UX. It confuses for no benefit. Be consistent - stick with the compression labelling, as above.
For the average user, they want to know what effect the setting will have - therefore 'compression' is the clearest description. The Export setting could be labelled 'Subsampling compression' then 'High (4:2:0), Medium (4:2:2), Low (4:4:0), None (4:4:4)' - this is consistent and easily understood by all.
> "smallest file, best quality" are also valid options and clear enough
Switching units for the same function is bad UX. It confuses for no benefit. Be consistent - stick with the compression labelling, as above.