Check out this new amazing image format!

Behold, .bgp, an image compression that looks vastly better than jpeg while maintaining the same file sizes.
(your browser should support it in the link below which is an image comparison)
http://xooyoozoo.github.io/yolo-octo-bugfixes/#eaglefairy&jpg=s&bpg=s
Further it supports transparency and more color depth than jpeg.

I for one have a lot of textures, and most of which are around 4k. After testing this format out they do certainly look better while being about the same size. This is a big deal. Obviously in an ideal world I would just use .tiff textures but those are BIG. .bgp looks nearly identical, in fact unless I zoomed in like 400% I really could not tell a difference between the .tiff and the .bgp, while I could see the difference normally vs jpeg.

(note, compressed images to no stay at the compressed size when in VRAM (few exceptions), the advantage is it can take up less disk space or bandwidth over the internet while looking better at the same or smaller sizes.)

.bgp is open source.
It’s based off the new HEVC video codec btw.

That’s interesting, then I’ll look at it.
Thanks for the info.

Also it has animation support and has a lossless mode.

EDIT

LOOK AT THIS!
http://bellard.org/bpg/animation.html

Oh I was going to post about how nobody is going to use this because… it’s going to take a while before Deviant art,CG society,BlenderArtists,etc is going to allow uploads in that format

But it’s open source so eh… maybe somebody who knows how to do exporters will implement this in blender

Also here is the website for bpg.
http://bellard.org/bpg/

It looks like instead of getting blocky like a jpg, it gets blurry when compressed.

While that is probably more or less true, you’ll notice that even so the color data and edge fidelity is better in tact by a fair bit compared to jpeg.

So the one thing I notice right away is that it’s based on HEVC which is basically H265. There are parts of H265 that are patented so it’s unclear weather or not those patents effect BGP.

It’s based off H265, Not the same thing however, nor is it by the same people.
bpg is completely open source.

Definitely an improvement on image quality. I’d be interested to see if this will take off

I think it mainly depends on if Adobe picks it up and lets all their programs use it. I’ve heard this could happen with the never version of the Adobe CC.

This is really neat,

can it be used as a texture in blender?

My humble opinion… I much rather use WebP, much more mature project, same (or more) features, open source and also has better compression than jpeg, PNG… https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/

And I guess the usual war between x264/HEVC vs WebM/VPx posts now begins…

unless browsers and software can open this format out of the box, people will never use it. Webp is still struggling to establish itself and it is backed by google. Webm has a little bit more success thanks to 4chan and youtube.
it is unfortunate but gif and jpeg and png are a tough act to beat, because they are so established everywhere.

Unfortunately adobe has some control over this as well.

Interesting that it might save a few bytes but it needs Javascript … I pass on such things, thanks but no thanks.

Blender already supports the .j2k image format, which is smaller than .jpg and has more advanced compression (for better preservation of quality).

Is there anything this format can do that j2k can’t? The tricky part with these new formats is that early adopters will have few options for where they can view, edit, and print their images.

Thanks for rephrasing what I said

Let me improve on top of it

you can’t replace Jpeg and png

they are already engrained into the culture of internet.

I’ve been comparing several images side by side on that site. For me, BPG have good details preservation. WebP is good too. Both support animations.
But apparently BPG could have some problems related to HEVC patent (is not clear):

Not the code which is OpenSource, but with the format/specification.

If I remember correctly, Google had guaranteed that there would be no problems about the freedom for WebP/WebM codec and specification.

It’s BPG not BGP, fix your original post.

Is this format supported by most common browsers or are these examples “illustrative”? It looks pretty good…

Is this format supported by most common browsers
Not natively