search

fire-eggs / DarkThumbs

Adds thumbnail preview to Windows Explorer for EPUB, FB2, DJVU and Kindle ebooks; 7Z, CB7, CBZ, CBR, RAR and ZIP archives.
452 stars 23 forks source link

WebP image format support #2

Closed reddevilrulez closed 4 years ago

reddevilrulez commented 4 years ago

Add WebP image format support - Doc MaKS

L0garithmic commented 4 years ago

Have you actually tried implementing this change yourself? Because DK404 said he tried and it did not work. He tried a few things. Webp as a format, seems to be a little more complex then just that line.

dark-knight404 commented 4 years ago

@L0garithmic is right. I tested by adding this line and adding a webp file to an epub archive and setting it as cover image in the opf file. But I couldn't see the thumbnail for it like I could for other image formats.

@reddevilrulez refer the following links for webp API reference and a decoder which converts webp to png:

  1. https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/docs/api#simple_decoding_api (API reference)
  2. https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/docs/dwebp (pre-built webp decoder)
  3. https://chromium.googlesource.com/webm/libwebp/+/refs/heads/master/examples/dwebp.c (decoder source code)
reddevilrulez commented 4 years ago

Thank You guys for the input and trying it out as well.

I assumed that the code which is handling PNG, JPG, etc... will be able to open WebP or is simply read from the system itself (i should have dug deeper). I am new to github as well as to C++, being, mainly a JAVA developer. I will try to learn Visual studio and see if anything is doable but will take some time.

I am in the process of converting most of my comics into WebP due to no visual loss in quality and size being greatly reduced. I hope you guys can figure this one out since i saw CDisplayEX able to handle WebP for thumbnails using libwebp.dll. The main reason i am not using CDisplayEX for cbr and cbz thumbnails is that CBXShell actually shows thumbnail for the right extensions i.e. if zip is cbz and rar is cbr. In case .cbz is actually a rar file (or .cbr is actually zip) then no thumbnail is shown and helps me to rename the file extension appropriately and quickly from windows explorer itself.

Regards, Doc MaKS

L0garithmic commented 4 years ago

Have you compared just using googles JPG compression vs webp. Example. Take a photo you are compressing to webp. Open google photos. stick it in google photos. Now, download it from google photos. Is it smaller then the original? Most likely. Is it smaller then the webp? Maybe, worth a shot.

for me, using mozjpg with quality 80 has very similar size reduction to google with none or no actually discernible quality loss. I actually built a script to automate this, I am in the process of releasing the finished product soon with a large suite of windows tools for eBooks.

reddevilrulez commented 4 years ago

Have you compared just using googles JPG compression vs webp. Example. Take a photo you are compressing to webp. Open google photos. stick it in google photos. Now, download it from google photos. Is it smaller then the original? Most likely. Is it smaller then the webp? Maybe, worth a shot.

for me, using mozjpg with quality 80 has very similar size reduction to google with none or no actually discernible quality loss. I actually built a script to automate this, I am in the process of releasing the finished product soon with a large suite of windows tools for eBooks.

Take a look: https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/docs/webp_study https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/docs/webp_lossless_alpha_study

I have been converting JPG to WebP for quite sometime now and can confirm that WebP (with the right settings) is smaller with no loss in quality. Works really well for high resolution images as well.

L0garithmic commented 4 years ago

I'm a believe it after I see it guy. Throw me a zip file of images. Say 5-6 originals. Then the same ones compressed via webp . I wanna run the originals through some compression tests and see for myself lol.

reddevilrulez commented 4 years ago

@L0garithmic, there is no need for such attitude. I am being plain and saying the above IMHO. Let's be professional. I am aware that some JPG can be compressed further without noticeable quality loss even on a 4K monitor but clearly you have more expertise on it. BPG had potential but has royalty costs. Maybe AVIF would be picked up. Again it depends on the type of image i.e. scenery, comic, etc...

Here's the links as you requested: Original: https://www2.zippyshare.com/v/vJppA2dj/file.html Converted: https://www2.zippyshare.com/v/AGh6objb/file.html

I am looking forward for your converter as well and will be happy to use it (i got tons of ebooks and space is running out).

L0garithmic commented 4 years ago

I'm not having attitude. I genuinely want to see if webp is smaller. I'm actually just seriously curious but again. I'm a gotta see it for myself guy.. Also since I have no idea how to configure a webp compressor. Figured would be easiest to take some from you and experiment. I'll look at them in the morning. Sorry if I came off as rude or anything. Not intentional

Edit: So, ran tests. WebP seems to of won at 17mb Ran it through mozjpeg at 70 (16mb) noticeable quality loss mozjpeg at 80 (19mb) negligible quality loss mozjpeg at 90 (24mb) negligible quality loss I tried fastcrush, smooth, optimize

pingo at 80 (did 1 file, resulted in too large a file size) guetzli at 85 (WAY too slow, only did 1 image, 20% larger then webp). google photos. (31mb) negligible quality loss ImageMagick with like a dozen different switches.

Seems, WebP at this moment, works the best. However I ONLY say that because it is doing some kind of intelligent de-noise filter on the comics. that is merging similar colors together so the photo actually looks better compressed. I just could not find the right switches to make it do the same, with jpg atm lol

reddevilrulez commented 4 years ago

Ok. Cool :)

For scanned comics and digital rips, WebP conversion seems to be working well. But for normal photography i found that from PNG to WebP is way better than JPG to WebP for most types of images with varied color, bitdepth etc...

Regards, Doc MaKS