Compare with other formats

[jonsneyers]

Gralic, flic, qlic: see https://github.com/FLIF-hub/FLIF/issues/28

[psykauze]

I've made some test with Gralic, flic, qlic and PackPNM

I'm sorry I can't download yet some of image sets

KODAK Set:
-    Gralic:      9 918 007
-    Flic:       10 943 582
-    PPN:      11 334 835
-    Qlic:       13 125 746
Lucas Set:
-    Gralic:   13 317 945
-    Flic:       14 137 842
-    PPN:      15 897 040
-    Qlic:       25 522 176
png-gallery Set:
-    Gralic:      3 162 045
-    Flic:          3 686 370
-    PPN:         3 459 921
-    Qlic:          4 538 368
SMBC Set:
-    Gralic:      3 546 141
-    Flic:          4 368 284
-    PPN:        4 439 027
-    Qlic:         9 887 212
webp-gallery Set:
-    Gralic:        305 443
-    Flic:            392 799
-    PPN:           350 012
-    Qlic:            676 651
wikipedia-photos Set:
-    Gralic:    62 818 086
-    Flic:        66 847 472
-    PPN:      73 449 832
-    Qlic:       75 087 377

[jonsneyers]

For comparison, these are the results I got for some recent version of FLIF:

Kodak set: 10 493 717 Lukas: 14 907 385 png-gallery: 4 118 486 SMBC: 2 896 567 webp-gallery: 395 129 wikipedia-photos: 69 733 385

Does anyone have some information on those other formats? Do they specialize in photographic images? Do they have progressive decoding?

[psykauze]

They are just specialised compressor. Gralic, flic and qlic are not maintained and there's no source code.

[gralic]

Gralic, flic and qlic are well maintained, QLIC 2.demo was released today.

[psykauze]

Thank you Alexander.

It was hard to find your news of your codec but I found it http://qlic.altervista.org/LPCB.html

(Also find really interresting discussions on encode.ru website)