TOtodotask·Nov 3, 2022
Google Brunsli was adopted for JPEG XL.
https://github.com/google/brunsli
https://www.codercto.com/a/103418.html
In The case for JPEG XLgoogle
brunsli
C++2020–2022
google / brunsli
brunsli
Practical JPEG Repacker
6Distinct people
6Mentions
0Explicit recommenders
758GitHub stars
What to know before exploring
What it is
Practical JPEG Repacker
GitHub
Where it is used
No documented product use has been verified yet.
What people are saying
No recommendation phrase was found in the indexed comments.
No classified warning is attached to this page. Read the discussions before treating silence as approval.
Also in these discussions
No other repository is repeatedly linked in the same discussions.
This week on Hacker News
Nov 7–Nov 14 UTC · Direct repository links and separately labeled related project stories. Indexed through 11/14/2026, 3:03:16 PM UTC.
No direct repository links were found in the indexed HN discussions over the past seven days. Older discussions are available below.
Mentions over time
HN mentions by year6 dated mentions
Observed mentions: 2020-02-07 11:15:02 UTC to 2022-11-03 06:24:06 UTC.
Counts come from the repository’s dated source evidence. Index cutoff: 2026-11-02 08:16:59 UTC.
View mention counts and date ranges
| Period | Start (UTC) | End (exclusive, UTC) | Mentions | Submissions | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2020 | 2020-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 4 | 1 | 3 |
| 2021 | 2021-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| 2022 | 2022-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 2023-01-01 00:00:00 UTC | 1 | 0 | 1 |
What Hacker News says
6 sourcesTo add to this, it's already possible to give this a try via building Brunsli from source:
https://github.com/google/brunsli
I personally use the cbrunsli/dbrunsli cmdline programs to archive old high-resolution JPEG photos that I've taken over the years. Having a gander at one subdirectory with 94 photos @ 354 MB in size, running cbrunsli on them brings the size down to 282 MB, which brings in savings of about 20%. And if I ever wanted to convert them back to JPEG, each file would be bit-identical to the originals.
Perhaps it's a little early to trust my data to JPEG XL/Brunsli, but I've ran tests comparing hundreds of MD5 checksums of JPEG files losslessly recreated by Brunsli, and have not yet ran into a single mismatch.
I can only say that I am very excited for the day that JPEG XL truly hits primetime.
In AVIF support enabled by default in Firefox 86And that is the reason why I dont like Open Media Alliance in General.
Not only does the best JPEG encoder perform as good if not better than the best WebP encoder. With a JPEG Repacker [1] JPEG file size could easily be 20% smaller. If you have to support a new format with relatively little benefits, why not just support using the repacked instead.
[1]https://github.com/google/brunsli
In Is WebP really better than JPEG?Brunsli: Practical JPEG repacker (now part of JPEG XL)
233 points · Open discussionI wonder if this is a reaction to the issue I opened :)
https://github.com/google/brunsli/issues/60
In JPEG Committee releases a call for evidence for image compression based on AIJPEG XL integrates https://github.com/google/brunsli , and when used in that mode, you can go back to the original JPEG file in a bit-exact way.
There is also a mode that only preserves the JPEG image data.
In FLIF – Free Lossless Image Format