As photographers, one of the first things we learn is that we should always shoot in raw. This gives us the most flexibility and data to work with in editing, with the drawback being large file sizes that have gotten even larger over the years. What if you could have all the flexibility of a raw file at ten percent of the file size?
In this video, I show you the power of how efficient JPEG XL can be in a professional workflow. Keep in mind that just because it has "JPEG" in the name does not mean it is like the JPEG format we've used for over 30 years. This is much more advanced, supporting 32-bit color depth, HDR, wide color gamuts, and a myriad of other features. Adobe introduced the ability to utilize JPEG XL in their DNG files last year, and you've likely been using it without even knowing it!
Since 2023, anytime you merge an image to a panorama or an HDR, it is now utilizing JPEG XL—which you might have noticed because file sizes got noticeably smaller without any loss of data. This same pipeline can be used for converting your raw images to lossy DNG files that give you most of the flexibility you want in editing, with a huge file savings.
In the video, I show you examples by zooming in to the maximum 1,600% for extreme pixel peeping. I discuss the downsides of converting your raw images this way and encourage you to try this on your own by guiding you through how to do it yourself. You’ll likely not be able to see a quality difference through example images on YouTube or on the web, like here on Fstoppers. You really should try it for yourself, as the results are incredibly impressive!
I'm excited for the potential in JPEGXL, but I'm going to guess it's going to have the same fate as JPEG2000 just because it's called JPEG.
I think Nikon's High-Efficiency RAW is a good idea because out of cameras like my Z6III, the RAW file size is only about 10-12MB ea at full resolution with no quality loss, *and* it keeps that mosiac data you need for DXO.
That said, 85MB for that Fuji RAW file is gross and makes me happy I don't shoot Fuji because... c'mon, that file size is just dumb.
--- "but I'm going to guess it's going to have the same fate as JPEG2000 just because it's called JPEG."
To be fair, when exporting to JPEG XL via LR, it's saved in a DNG container and the option is "Use Lossy Compression". No one would see "JPEG" unless they dug in the exif.
Pretty nice. With the 5 minutes I spent testing it:
Pros:
1. Significantly smaller size.
2. Opens pretty quickly with Capture One, Evoto, Lightroom, and Photoshop. Because it's compressed, I was expecting a delay for it decompress similar to compressed TIFF and PSD files in Photoshop. No such delay.
Cons:
1. JPEG XL does not appear to be natively supported in Windows. Although, I can open the files via software I listed above, when viewing in file explorer there's no thumbnails. There's probably some workaround, but, I'm not going to do all that.
With that said, I think I'm too paranoid to convert fully. Having the raw files just gives me that extra sense of security. But, if collaborating where I need to send raw like images, I may try this route.