jpegli
No written verdict yet. Here is what commenters said.
5recommend
0warn against
Dec 1, 2025first mention
Sep 15, 2026latest mention
Why people recommend it
“Jpegli offer enough quality improvement and advantage without introducing an entirely new codec”
“Lossy WebP does not make as much sense though since jpegli entered the game.”
Show 3 more
“If you need the images for the web: go for jpegli, webp and avif”
“Still no support for Google's own Jpegli”
“consider trying jpegli[1], it does an impressive job”
Caveats and dissent
No one in these comments warned against it.
Threads where it came up
- The case against JPEG XL 2 mentions
- The AV2 Video Standard Has Released (Final v1.0 Specification) 2 mentions
- Journey to JPEG XL: open-source experiments shaped the future of image coding 1 mention
- Make images smaller using best-in-class codecs, right in the browser 1 mention
- Google unkills JPEG XL? 1 mention
Also written as Jpegli. Data: jpegli.json. Quotes are verbatim; the verdict and theme labels are written by a model from these comments, and every clause links to its sources.
All comments 7
“Jpegli offer enough quality improvement and advantage without introducing an entirely new codec”
“Lossy WebP does not make as much sense though since jpegli entered the game.”
“If you need the images for the web: go for jpegli, webp and avif”
“The avif looks much better to my eye, and is of cource much smaller”
“is it that much better than jpegli”
“Still no support for Google's own Jpegli”
“consider trying jpegli[1], it does an impressive job”