I've had great results using JPEG-XS to transport video for colour grading in feature film & TV post production. At 3:1 or 4:1 compression ratio is effectively lossless.
replyIt is patent-encumbered though, you have to pay license fees to deploy it.
Isn't the point of JPEG to have lossy compression for your photos that still looks fine? As opposed to something like PNG, which has lossless compression
reply"JPEG" is short for Joint Photographic Experts Group, an ISO/ITU group that creates a lot of imaging standards. The JPEG image format you're thinking of is only one of the formats they've created.
replyThe Joint Photographic Experts Group manages many standards, generally each called "JPEG [something]". The one we most commonly call "JPEG" is just one of them.
replydeleted
replyReading that it looks like the point of JPEG-XS is to have near-lossless compression for raw photo and video data while having extremely high throughput.
replyJPEG XS supports either near lossless or truly lossless encoding depending on encoder configuration.
reply> Additionally, JPEG XS compressed content is indistinguishable from the original uncompressed content.
replyIt can be indistinguishable, as long as you stick with lossless or very low compression ratios. It falls apart at typical JPEG XL compression ratios.
Not royalty free, unfortunately.
replyWe use JXS when latency is critical. Most h24/265 decodes will have a 10 frame glass-glass delay, JXS drops that to 3 or 4, at a cost of bandwidth (our UHD jxs streams are 1.5gbit rather than 200mbit for hevc)
replyYeah, we've been deploying JPEG-XS for high bitrate streaming for a while.
replyA lot of our customers are moving their grading systems into data centres and streaming the images over IP back to their grading suites.
I've got it down to less than 1 frame for encode-transport-decode, but you've still got to copy the image to an SDI card and wait for that to clock out.