P: JPEG XL support

[Foxtrot314]

Hello, I would like if JPEG XL support was added into Photoshop. It would allow me to use single format for lossy and lossless photos.

Thanks. 

[Foxtrot314]

Google Chrome killed JPEG XL because they dont want competitor to their own AVIF format. It's simple anti-competitive behavior combined with "Not invented here" syndrom.

Btw, another more popular thread for JPEG XL support is here: https://community.adobe.com/t5/photoshop-ecosystem-ideas/jpeg-xl-support/idi-p/13420524

[davescm]

I was going to merge the two threads, but the two ideas are different. One asking for JpegXL support in Photoshop as a file format , this thread asking for JpegXL compression within the existing PSD format.
It is therefore appropriate to keep them separate.

Dave

[sacb0y]

Given the idea has received only 2 votes in 2 weeks though, I wouldn't hold my breath.\

davescm 

People aren't really paying attention to the format issues arising partly cause compatibility of these formats is so poor elsewhere. 

We could have a content revolution for HDR images like we have for video but the fact programs like photoshop don't make it easy to make, and browsers and websites don't make it easy to view is extremely frustrating.

I just wish photoshop at least stopped relegating things like this to entirely photography workflows not workflows for PSD cause this stuff is really needed for Games or Animation. 

Don't just take feedback Adobe be ahead of the curve 😞

[Foxtrot314]

And about speed/compression.

If people need speed and have enough space, then use no compression, ok.

But for example I have many photos in TIFF that are done. They just sit on my drive. I dont need speed for something I dont open for months/years. I need best compression because I want to save space.

So there definitely is strong usecase for JPEG XL either as TIFF/PSD compression method or as separate working format.

Right now I use TIFF with ZIP compression because thats the best compression for working format I can get. I dont care that saving takes long. And if JPEG XL can get me even better compression I want it.

[Daniel NAG]

I opened it exactly because there was the other one, becaude I thought it consequential that when you support a format you already have the bit to extend the PSD capability. I would say that it does matter merging the two "requests".

[Nancy OShea]

Why not just ZIP files to save storage space?

[Foxtrot314]

You mean zipping already compressed image files? Did you ever tried that? Because ZIP doesnt work for already compressed files. It doesnt make them smaller than they already are.

I think that comparison of compression methods for one example photo will best demonstrate what I mean:

Original RAW (.NEF): 23MB

PSD: 58MB

PSD + external ZIP: 46MB

TIFF uncompressed: 60MB

TIFF LZW: 30MB

TIFF ZIP: 28MB

PNG: 27MB

WEBP lossless: 19MB

JPEG XL lossless: 16MB

As you can clearly see JPEG XL is the best solution for lossless compression. And because it support layers it can by itself be used as high compression alternative for TIFF.

Or just as compression method inside TIFF. I dont care, but I want that compression.

JPEG XL can offer better compression by 43% in comarision to TIFF ZIP as a working format.

[Nancy OShea]

I keep native PSD files for future editing.

Under no circumstances would I replace PSDs with flat files.

[Jon Sneyers]

JPEG XL also supports layers. It only supports normal blending (and a few other blend modes but certainly not all of the blend modes of Photoshop) and it doesn't support layer effects, but for the basic use cases of layered images, it can be used to store an image (lossy or lossless) with the layers preserved, no flattening/merging needed. Layer names can be preserved too.

Of course it's not a replacement for PSD — there are plenty of things it doesn't support, like text layers etc. But it could be quite useful as an interchange format, like TIFF but with better compression.

[davescm]

For anyone interested in learning more about the encoding /decoding methods of jpegXL I've linked a white paper below:

http://ds.jpeg.org/whitepapers/jpeg-xl-whitepaper.pdf

Dave

[Stephen Marsh]

As @sacb0y notes, Adobe Camera Raw does support saving/opening JPEG-XL, so there is limited support, just not directly in Photoshop for layered saves/opens.

[Koushakur]

Apple recently fully embraced jpeg xl by, among other things, adding support to Safari. Now more than ever is the time to add support for exporting jpeg xl's

[Eccentric Locust]

Gonna revive the thread and pitch in my two cents here. I also very much support the implementation of the JPEG XL (.jxl) image file format in Adobe products.

After some research, I understand that JPEG XL has the benefits of a more efficent compression standard as well as better image quality when preserving the details. Having a smaller file size while also having better image quality on export means that images using JPEG XL will not only be much better looking, but will also be easier to store as well as display to audiences and consumers.

I also support the inclusion of the AVIF image file format as well since they both perform similarly. However, see that there is some form of contention between JPEG XL and Google that they would rather prefer AVIF over JPEG XL. I do hope there can be some settlement there.

I feel if Adobe were to enable support for the JPEG XL (.jxl) file format, then it may open up further opportunities and help influence other companies and brands to support it as well. This helps the artists in preserving the quality of their work, as well as the audiences in appreciating the artwork in all of its detail.

Overall, I highly recommend Adobe to enable support for JPEG XL. It would be wonderful for us to be able to play around with this format and promote higher quality work.

[sacb0y]

People need to force these browsers hand to just pick a damn format.

[reproo2773183]

Seems a bit silly to not only support this, but actually use this format in Lightroom and ACR and yet still not be able to open or save in Photoshop. JPEG XL looks like the perfect back-up format for edited photos, alongside the RAW+XMP.

[Lumigraphics]

I suspect that JPEG XL *compression* will be used (its already available in Photoshop) but the *format* is already DOA.

AVIF and HEIC are better choices. As for archiving, use TIFF or PSD.

[sacb0y]

AVIF also finally has support across all browsers
AVIF image format | Can I use... Support tables for HTML5, CSS3, etc

Now if only adobe would stop wasting time with features no one asked for. And add things people NEED to use OUTSIDE OF CAMERA RAW!

This is doubly frustrating cause not even affinity photo lets you save avif. All this annoyance for reasons I don't care about.

This and HDR support, and the program will be somewhat brought up to the modern age. Rather than be archaic.

A bunch of AI tools nice as they are does not make a program modern.

[Rafael35200704y345]

Unfortunately, that seems not so easy .... interop 

[colind66897557]

Vips is working on integrating foreign jxl compression to TIFF containers. Having the option to losslessly compress legacy media and open it in photoshop would be a blessing. Lightroom can already view JXL and Photoshop can export it. I don't see why we cannot open JXL in PS

[reproo2773183]

"Photoshop can Export it"

not seeing that option in Photoshop, where is it hidden?

[Lumigraphics]

Camera RAW.

[om35561960t2ps]

Any updates on this?

[Lumigraphics]

Just a note, Apple has added native JPEG XL support to macOS Sequoia.

[reproo2773183]

think Apple is now using JPEG XL in the latest iPhone

[Firewave]

Adding another vote for JPEG XL open/export support in Photoshop, and improved open/export in Bridge and Camera RAW.

It's frustrating that it's been supported on Apple platforms for over a year (introduced in Safari 17 last year for iOS and macOS) and the native support improved even further this year across iOS/macOS (e.g. you can now just open a .jxl file in Preview and Finder like any other image), but there's still no way to directly open or export a .jxl from Photoshop.  For a current web project we're working on, we have to output images from Photoshop as PNG and then have scripting to run them through a JPEG XL encoder.

Given its significant size and performance advantages over JPEG and the continued expansion of support by CDNs, online stores and other tools, having the ability to export a .jxl from Photoshop is a must.  It should work like the current JPEG export, allowing quality to be configured for lossy or lossless.

Bridge and Camera RAW's implementations are also incomplete and don't correctly decode/render some .jxl files (wrong tone mapping, etc).