Table of Contents
Fetching ...

Users prefer Jpegli over same-sized libjpeg-turbo or MozJPEG

Martin Bruse, Luca Versari, Zoltan Szabadka, Jyrki Alakuijala

TL;DR

Compressing images at a quality similar to libjpeg-turbo quality 95, the Jpegli images were 54% likely to be preferred over both libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG images, but used only 2.8 bits per pixel compared to libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG that used 3.8 and 3.5 bits per pixel respectively.

Abstract

We performed pairwise comparisons by human raters of JPEG images from MozJPEG, libjpeg-turbo and our new Jpegli encoder. When compressing images at a quality similar to libjpeg-turbo quality 95, the Jpegli images were 54% likely to be preferred over both libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG images, but used only 2.8 bits per pixel compared to libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG that used 3.8 and 3.5 bits per pixel respectively. The raw ratings and source images are publicly available for further analysis and study.

Users prefer Jpegli over same-sized libjpeg-turbo or MozJPEG

TL;DR

Compressing images at a quality similar to libjpeg-turbo quality 95, the Jpegli images were 54% likely to be preferred over both libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG images, but used only 2.8 bits per pixel compared to libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG that used 3.8 and 3.5 bits per pixel respectively.

Abstract

We performed pairwise comparisons by human raters of JPEG images from MozJPEG, libjpeg-turbo and our new Jpegli encoder. When compressing images at a quality similar to libjpeg-turbo quality 95, the Jpegli images were 54% likely to be preferred over both libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG images, but used only 2.8 bits per pixel compared to libjpeg-turbo and MozJPEG that used 3.8 and 3.5 bits per pixel respectively. The raw ratings and source images are publicly available for further analysis and study.
Paper Structure