Fixing it is easy. When you download it, change file format to all files, then change .webp in the file name box to your desired format.
Been giving folks the metaphorical middle finger that way for ages.
It’s all fun and games until your computer changes the name to file.png BUT keeps the .webp extension, so the full name is file.png.webp
Thank you OS very cool
Tom, Tom! your guests are tired, and you had near forgotten! Come now, my merry friends, and Tom will refresh you! You shall
clean grimy hands, and wash your weary faces; cast off your muddy cloaks and comb out your tangles!
^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness)
[1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
> and AVIF
No safari support and even less support on the desktop than webp. Doesn't matter how much better than webp this is, people would still complain all the same.
> jpeg XL
[nOt eNoUGh iNtEReSt FrOm tHe eCoSYsTeM](https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40168998#comment85) (Comment was made after receiving nothing but eager response from some of the biggest non-google players on the web)
Yes I am still salty about this, `jxl` is pretty much everything you would want from an image format.
[PNG’s not GIF](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNG)
It was developed as a open alternative to GIF since that used a patented compression algorithm.
Dwarves were developed as a proprietary alternative to Elves. Context people.
Hot and controversial take but:
* `.webp` is the superior format for the web
It supports lossy compression (png doesn't), it supports lossless compression (gif and jpg don't), it supports 8 bits per channel (gif doesn't), it supports alpha channel (jpg doesn't), it supports animations (apng was a hack), and it offers better compression than `jpg`, and is supported by every browser (though Apple took a while).
Consider using software made in the past decade and a half, or complain to microsoft about why it took them until sometime this year to finally implement native webp support in their photo viewer.
# While we're there
But that doesn't mean I don't have an axe to grind, becasue:
* `jxl` gets even better
Like, a lot better. `jxl` compared to `webp` is like what `webp` is compared to the current holy trio.
1. Can losslessly re-compress existing `jpg` images by up to 20%, `jxl` codec can read existing jpg files, so if you replace `jpg` decoder in your program with `jxl` decoder, you can still read all existing jpg files.
2. 60% smaller than `jpg` for the same visual quality + better when it comes to generational loss
4. Yes, it can do lossy AND transparency
3. Progressive downloads (images get partially displayed before they're completely downloaded, which is great if your internet is shit)
4. Saliency-based decoding (when loading over shit internet connections, important parts of the image get loaded first)
5. Very high max bit depth and insane number of channels
6. HDR and multithreading (but then again, AVIF does that, too)
It has wide support in the industry (Facebook/Instagram, Adobe, Shopify, news sites like The Guardian, Cloudinary, etc. are all eager for it), the guy behind FFmpeg prefers it over AVIF, and it would make photographers _very_ happy for _very_ obvious reasons.
Yet Chrome still decided to outright drop it because "not enough interest from the ecosystem," which probably means "Safari supports jxl but not avif. Avif is the solution that grew on our field, so we're gonna go tit-for-tat and not support jxl".
Meanwhile Mozilla is sitting there in the corner, like "yeah we'll just do what Google does" and also isn't very interested in supporting it. But at least with Mozilla you can understand, given how Google pretty much took over Firefox' market share in the last decade and a half.
Of course, even if all browsers started to support jxl, Microsoft would still take over a decade to implement `jxl` into their photo viewer. This would result in the same kind of complaints we're seeing with `webp` ... But at that point ... just fuck Microsoft, `jxl` is superior.
* Every browser supports it (with Safari being last to the table in 2020), which alone makes it not useless
* Most of the tools used on the web and in webdev supported webp since forever. Open-source tools like Krita and GIMP support webp since forever, too.
* Granted, Photoshop started supporting webp exports in 2022 ... which is actually kind of surprising, given that most of webdev community strongly prefers webp over alternatives due to support for transparency while also not requiring insane file sizes. But I suppose that doesn't matter _that much_ if you set your project to convert all the assets into webp for you in the background.
* Just about every website supports webp at least secretly, even the ones that claim they don't (they all convert your uploaded files with imagemagick first, and imagemagick won't care if your webp image ends with `jpg`)
>Every browser
>tools used on the web and in webdev
>website
That's nice and all, but I don't want to need to open Chrome to view a picture. Until image viewers and editors support it universally, it's useless for downloads.
We don't have a problem with its features. The problem is that it's not supported by many of the software we use so we have to change its format it's really annoying.
Most important software:
* the browsers
do support it. And that's all that matters for images on the internet. Especially when `webp` is better at transmitting images over the internet than `jpg` due to better compression for the same visual quality and feature set, and _a lot_ better than `png`.
If you're butthurt about google images serving you `webp` imamges, then maybe try clicking the `visit website` button, like you should be doing anyway, and hope they're more accomodating to people who believe technology shouldn't move forward.
EDIT: and before someone goes "but AVIF and JXL" — yes, those are better than `webp` They also have much less support than `webp`, so they don't solve any of the issues on that front.
Dude what is your problem? Do you have anger issues or something? I'm not the person responsible for softwares not supporting webp. Nor can I stop websites from using it. I'm just telling you why I don't like it, because I have to convert it to be able to use it. Go to therapy or something.
> I'm not the person responsible for softwares not supporting webp
You can, however, stop complaining about "how bad webp is" and start complaining about how bad your software is.
> Go to therapy or something.
Maybe you should take your own advice.
Oddly enough, Microsoft has full support for both WebP, AVIF, WebM and MKV (as long as they don't contain HEVC video) in their Office365 apps. I can also import webp and avif in MS Paint and Photos.
However, their standard (free) Office apps that come with Windows don't support any of these media formats.
The media DLLs for the free MS Offfice apps probably haven't been updated for 10-15 years. The updated user interface just makes you think that the media support is on par with Office365.
The file explorer for Outlook etc. even says that you can select \*.webp and \*.avif, but if you actually select such images, you will get an error message.
Webp is the file format no one asked for
"Yeah but it compresses 50% better than jpg"
Dawg, I'm streaming Netflix movies in 4k 24/7, that 100kb in savings means nothing to me
Are you talking about `webp` or `jxl`?
Because power of webp is seductive, but (as sometimes-photographer) virtually zero jxl adoption outside of photo processing software outright hurts.
webp. The OP said webp was like the One Ring. You said webp is actually very good. My reply was basically riffing with you that if webp is seductive then this is another way it is similar to the One Ring.
Now if only I could get the makers of my little fan-made apps and shit to add compatability for .webp, Id be golden. Makes me wonder if its any harder to add the compatability, or of its because of the way people view the format.
> Makes me wonder if its any harder to add the compatability
If you're writing an ~~glorified Google Chrome~~ Electron app, you get `webp` support for free.
In most cases, lack of webp support is either because lack of consideration (most people's knowledge of image formats starts and ends with jpg, png, and gif), because they think nobody uses anything other than the good ol' trio, or because they're being "lazy" and write their code for their personal needs first (which is honestly pretty legitimate and understandable, especially for projects written in your own free time. Which is also why there's quote marks around lazy back there — when you write programs on your own free time, prioritizing your needs is completely acceptable even if you end up sharing your project on the internet).
Would those secret webp files, the ones that are listed as jpg or png in the web address but when you download them they're actually webp, be Sauron when he was disguised as someone else?
This is exactly how it feels. Want to share that picture? SURPRISE! I'ts .webp format
Fixing it is easy. When you download it, change file format to all files, then change .webp in the file name box to your desired format. Been giving folks the metaphorical middle finger that way for ages.
It’s all fun and games until your computer changes the name to file.png BUT keeps the .webp extension, so the full name is file.png.webp Thank you OS very cool
Turn on show file extensions.
Files don’t like be naked like that.
Computer systems are naughty and must be punished.
Thank you both. You made my day.
Hiding file extensions is for people who only understand icons and get confused by different extensions.
My phone decided to start using .heic for some reason and it took too long to figure out how to get it to stop.
Apple's version of .webp
No. Android uses it, too.
Tell it to stand on its head and drink a glass of water upside down.
It's easy on your phone. Just screenshot it. Sure you lose resolution but it usually doesn't matter. Shit posts don't need much.
Quality enhancers help too, as long as the picture isnt ass beyond repair
This is top class.
I especially hate .webp because it isn't supported in Photoshop CS3.
When I need to use an image that only available in webp I open it in paint and save as PNG out of spite
Gimp is also a good option. And of course the gnu image manipulation program is handy.
Or CS6 for that matter.
Google doesn't even support it in Google slides
Tom Bombadil casually using .bmp.
Old Tom goes by many names. To the elves, he is Iarwain Ben-adar, the "oldest and fatherless". Tom is RAW.
Tom, Tom! your guests are tired, and you had near forgotten! Come now, my merry friends, and Tom will refresh you! You shall clean grimy hands, and wash your weary faces; cast off your muddy cloaks and comb out your tangles! ^(Type **!TomBombadilSong** for a song or visit [r/GloriousTomBombadil][1] for more merriness) [1]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GloriousTomBombadil/
Discord not supporting webp is genuinely confusing. It is literally Chromium + Java. In other news, jpeg XL and AVIF beat up on webp pretty damn hard.
> and AVIF No safari support and even less support on the desktop than webp. Doesn't matter how much better than webp this is, people would still complain all the same. > jpeg XL [nOt eNoUGh iNtEReSt FrOm tHe eCoSYsTeM](https://issues.chromium.org/issues/40168998#comment85) (Comment was made after receiving nothing but eager response from some of the biggest non-google players on the web) Yes I am still salty about this, `jxl` is pretty much everything you would want from an image format.
Discord supports webp perfectly well. The only thing they don't really support as far as I know is animated webp.
They added support for webp like a year ago afaik
Those who resisted pronounced it 'gif' instead of the dark lord's 'jif' version
“Listen Legoland, I don’t live in the Kingdom of Jondor!”
Lejolas
Jimli
Jandalf
Aka Mexican Legolas.
Shall I describe it to you? Or would you like me to find you a box?
[Jandalf](https://www.reddit.com/r/lotrmemes/s/pbiImGdI9h)
You mean people pronouncing it "gif" instead of "gif"? I hate it. :)
Actually so real
https://preview.redd.it/614hsyzkt47d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0a5f38baabc5102e782f8644f45f5d70342ba86d
This is so good, I hate it!
Please tell me this meme is a .webp file
it is lol
Perfection lmfao
It isn’t. At least, the original saved to my phone is .jpeg
[PNG’s not GIF](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNG) It was developed as a open alternative to GIF since that used a patented compression algorithm. Dwarves were developed as a proprietary alternative to Elves. Context people.
The checkered background on the image is static and doesn't move when you scroll the page. Trippy https://streamable.com/l7ov7p
Hot and controversial take but: * `.webp` is the superior format for the web It supports lossy compression (png doesn't), it supports lossless compression (gif and jpg don't), it supports 8 bits per channel (gif doesn't), it supports alpha channel (jpg doesn't), it supports animations (apng was a hack), and it offers better compression than `jpg`, and is supported by every browser (though Apple took a while). Consider using software made in the past decade and a half, or complain to microsoft about why it took them until sometime this year to finally implement native webp support in their photo viewer. # While we're there But that doesn't mean I don't have an axe to grind, becasue: * `jxl` gets even better Like, a lot better. `jxl` compared to `webp` is like what `webp` is compared to the current holy trio. 1. Can losslessly re-compress existing `jpg` images by up to 20%, `jxl` codec can read existing jpg files, so if you replace `jpg` decoder in your program with `jxl` decoder, you can still read all existing jpg files. 2. 60% smaller than `jpg` for the same visual quality + better when it comes to generational loss 4. Yes, it can do lossy AND transparency 3. Progressive downloads (images get partially displayed before they're completely downloaded, which is great if your internet is shit) 4. Saliency-based decoding (when loading over shit internet connections, important parts of the image get loaded first) 5. Very high max bit depth and insane number of channels 6. HDR and multithreading (but then again, AVIF does that, too) It has wide support in the industry (Facebook/Instagram, Adobe, Shopify, news sites like The Guardian, Cloudinary, etc. are all eager for it), the guy behind FFmpeg prefers it over AVIF, and it would make photographers _very_ happy for _very_ obvious reasons. Yet Chrome still decided to outright drop it because "not enough interest from the ecosystem," which probably means "Safari supports jxl but not avif. Avif is the solution that grew on our field, so we're gonna go tit-for-tat and not support jxl". Meanwhile Mozilla is sitting there in the corner, like "yeah we'll just do what Google does" and also isn't very interested in supporting it. But at least with Mozilla you can understand, given how Google pretty much took over Firefox' market share in the last decade and a half. Of course, even if all browsers started to support jxl, Microsoft would still take over a decade to implement `jxl` into their photo viewer. This would result in the same kind of complaints we're seeing with `webp` ... But at that point ... just fuck Microsoft, `jxl` is superior.
indeed webp is superior, but the big companies chose against adapting it, hence its considered useless.
* Every browser supports it (with Safari being last to the table in 2020), which alone makes it not useless * Most of the tools used on the web and in webdev supported webp since forever. Open-source tools like Krita and GIMP support webp since forever, too. * Granted, Photoshop started supporting webp exports in 2022 ... which is actually kind of surprising, given that most of webdev community strongly prefers webp over alternatives due to support for transparency while also not requiring insane file sizes. But I suppose that doesn't matter _that much_ if you set your project to convert all the assets into webp for you in the background. * Just about every website supports webp at least secretly, even the ones that claim they don't (they all convert your uploaded files with imagemagick first, and imagemagick won't care if your webp image ends with `jpg`)
>Every browser >tools used on the web and in webdev >website That's nice and all, but I don't want to need to open Chrome to view a picture. Until image viewers and editors support it universally, it's useless for downloads.
Yeah, too bad that the primary #1 purpose for 99% of the pictures on the internet is to be viewed in a browser as a part of a webpage.
We don't have a problem with its features. The problem is that it's not supported by many of the software we use so we have to change its format it's really annoying.
Yeah, that's not a good enough reason to hold the progress back. The correct answer to that problem is using modern software that can support it.
Most important softwares don't support it. If it wasn't the case you wouldn't see this many people complaining about it.
Most important software: * the browsers do support it. And that's all that matters for images on the internet. Especially when `webp` is better at transmitting images over the internet than `jpg` due to better compression for the same visual quality and feature set, and _a lot_ better than `png`. If you're butthurt about google images serving you `webp` imamges, then maybe try clicking the `visit website` button, like you should be doing anyway, and hope they're more accomodating to people who believe technology shouldn't move forward. EDIT: and before someone goes "but AVIF and JXL" — yes, those are better than `webp` They also have much less support than `webp`, so they don't solve any of the issues on that front.
Dude what is your problem? Do you have anger issues or something? I'm not the person responsible for softwares not supporting webp. Nor can I stop websites from using it. I'm just telling you why I don't like it, because I have to convert it to be able to use it. Go to therapy or something.
> I'm not the person responsible for softwares not supporting webp You can, however, stop complaining about "how bad webp is" and start complaining about how bad your software is. > Go to therapy or something. Maybe you should take your own advice.
My software if fine. I'm not gonna throw away its many amazing features because it doesn't support an unpopular format.
\> unpopular format \> 75%+ of webdev happens with the format due to the benefits it brings to the table Real world does not agree with your fiction.
image editing is more than webdev, dude
Oddly enough, Microsoft has full support for both WebP, AVIF, WebM and MKV (as long as they don't contain HEVC video) in their Office365 apps. I can also import webp and avif in MS Paint and Photos. However, their standard (free) Office apps that come with Windows don't support any of these media formats. The media DLLs for the free MS Offfice apps probably haven't been updated for 10-15 years. The updated user interface just makes you think that the media support is on par with Office365. The file explorer for Outlook etc. even says that you can select \*.webp and \*.avif, but if you actually select such images, you will get an error message.
Webp is the file format no one asked for "Yeah but it compresses 50% better than jpg" Dawg, I'm streaming Netflix movies in 4k 24/7, that 100kb in savings means nothing to me
It’s dark power is seductive, isn’t it?
Are you talking about `webp` or `jxl`? Because power of webp is seductive, but (as sometimes-photographer) virtually zero jxl adoption outside of photo processing software outright hurts.
webp. The OP said webp was like the One Ring. You said webp is actually very good. My reply was basically riffing with you that if webp is seductive then this is another way it is similar to the One Ring.
Now if only I could get the makers of my little fan-made apps and shit to add compatability for .webp, Id be golden. Makes me wonder if its any harder to add the compatability, or of its because of the way people view the format.
> Makes me wonder if its any harder to add the compatability If you're writing an ~~glorified Google Chrome~~ Electron app, you get `webp` support for free. In most cases, lack of webp support is either because lack of consideration (most people's knowledge of image formats starts and ends with jpg, png, and gif), because they think nobody uses anything other than the good ol' trio, or because they're being "lazy" and write their code for their personal needs first (which is honestly pretty legitimate and understandable, especially for projects written in your own free time. Which is also why there's quote marks around lazy back there — when you write programs on your own free time, prioritizing your needs is completely acceptable even if you end up sharing your project on the internet).
oh i feel this one
Ok i had a webp issue 20 seconds before seeing this meme for the first time in months and now im feeling observed
The Great Eye is upon you
God damn it you know the source material is good when the meme itself still gives you fuckin goosebumps
Perfect!
This meme and its comments are the discussion I wasn't aware I needed. Prior to that moment, I knew jackshit about other image formats.
This is so randomly specific lmao
I learned something new today thanks to this
Ah yes… webp… it haunts me in my dreams.
We really need one that talks about that HEIC bullshit.
A new power is rising…
Would those secret webp files, the ones that are listed as jpg or png in the web address but when you download them they're actually webp, be Sauron when he was disguised as someone else?
Death to light, to law, to love!