this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2026
263 points (97.1% liked)
Technology
86504 readers
4622 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Please stop making gifs at all. It's a terrible format that creates massive files that look like shit.
Webm is supported almost everywhere now and manages better quality at higher framerates and smaller file sizes.
Counterpoint: GIFs loop by default in basically every app, WEBM doesn't
Can just use avif instead, it holds an AV1 stream and acts like gifs/images do WRT looping — also very broad support (more than AV1 in WebM containers).
Demonstration:
Edit: switched to an example with simpler decode requirements.
Your demonstration is a sluggishly loading static image on my end, so I guess support isnt that widespread :P
(Im using the app "Summit")
I checked that app's source code, and basically they're doing their own avif decode call instead of relying on a browser/webview to handle it. So essentially they forgot/don't know/don't intend to implement animated avif. Looks like they also use the aom reference decoder instead of using something faster like dav1d.
Static image, also Summit.
Static image, Eternity.
Boost for Lemmy is not a fan.
That's caused by bad regex in the app, it's getting confused about domains.
e: attempted fix by using an aliased domain.
It's unfortunately not that simple. The AVIF doesn't load at Jerboa, for example :/
Works great as a static image. Would probably be better if it actually played...
(on Arctic on ios) the uploaded image displays as a static image for me. Even clicking on it and waiting, it doesn’t seem to animate :T
Edit: I checked again through the Voyager app, and it did indeed load, though it took around 45-60 seconds* for it to get through the entire animation before it started looping again, albeit at the same speed as the first playthrough.
I chalked it up to the outdated hardware, as you mentioned in your reply. Cheers! :)
Apple has limited support for AV1 streams (yes, even for software decode) unless on very recent hardware. Here's an AV1 stream inside a webm container for comparison, would be interesting to see if that works over the avif container on your stack.
This doesn't work for me but the original one you posted does (Voyager, iPhone 14 pro)
Very interesting, thank you!
Ah yeah, that would explain it - my phone is now pretty outdated (I’m on a 12) - I clicked on the image link in your response but it didn’t load for me, unfortunately.
I’m not sure if that’s a result of my outdated hardware or if I perhaps clicked on it before it had a chance to process your upload, but you seem much more knowledgeable than I, so I’m going to assume it’s my hardware. I appreciate the response and the second attempt, though! :)
It's an intentional behavior by Apple. Basically they just don't support AV1 videostreams unless the hardware you're using has a hardware decoder (read: very new). They could support it using software decode (what browsers typically do for AV1 inside avif containers) but.... for whatever reasons don't.
Haha, ye$, for rea$on$, I'm $ure... :D
I'm not sure demand for AV1 is enough to ship units
Probably either laziness or they want to avoid software decoding in general for performance reasons
I think that's a reasonable way to look at it.
It's not the route I'd take, after all, the video tag in html supports specifying multiple sources (including different formats/encodings), and with full control of the stack (they vend Safari) you could have logic on devices without AV1 hardware that prefers the AVC/HEVC/VP9 sources instead — then fallback to AV1 SW if it's the only option. That seems a better user experience than just failing to display content.
Works for me Voyager Pixel 8 Pro
Your example image doesn't work in boost while the gif above does :/
For the record, this is static in my Lemmy app (Summit).
Same here
your demo is a static image.
Fwiw it works on the desktop's alexandrite ui and on the thunder app
an Osman classic
Does not work on Voyager for Android, the humble inefficient GIF continues in spite of more efficient options
I’ve honestly given up on support of new formats.
Here we are, 2026, and brand new software like Lemmy:
Doesn’t support AVIF
Doesn’t support JXL
Doesn’t support WebP
Won’t upload short, small videos either.
Meanwhile:
Many clients won’t play animated WebP
Most clients won’t play APNG
Many won’t load AVIF
Basically only Apple/Safari will load JXL
VP8/VP9/AV1 support in video isn’t universal
What am I supposed to do?
I used to send support requests over this, but I’ve given up. We are going to be stuck with SDR JPEGs and blocky GIFs forever, especially since media format literacy seems to be globally.
You decide what to target, and work with what you have. That's how it's always been with web technology.
If you need to support the barest minimal possible clients then you might not even have HTML5. Otherwise, if you have HTML5 you can use the
sourcetag to provide clients with a choice of formats/encodings and they can pick the one they support. If the clients can't even mange that, well, things on the internet have always been broken anyway.And somebody's gotta start somewhere, WebP was shoved down everyones' throats and now it's supported very broadly, as AVIF pick up users software devs will take notice and start supporting it.
Will they, though?
I cite Lemmy again. This is supposed to be a newer, better version of Reddit, basically, but I can't even upload a WebP to my instance... when are they supposed to adopt AVIF?
If I try to host externally, which is more of a pain, very few image hosts will take an AVIF. Not a single one I found except catbox will take a JXL.
Where's the pressure? Who's making these files and trying to use them? Even my phone converts uploaded JXL and HEIF files to SDR JPEGs upon upload, since it rightfully assumes nothing will work with them.
I hate to sound so cynical, but I had your mindset a while back. And outside Apple, precisely nothing has changed. Its gotten more dramatic, if anything, since HDR support is now basically DOA too.
The standards bodies and the companies that pay their bills. That's Netflix, Google, et al. All have a vested interest in good multimedia support in browsers. It's why browsers have shockingly good support actually, most of the problems are downstream on clients and implementations that don't know or care to enable these newer formats.
Maybe I overestimated how widespread support for alternatives is. The problem seems to be to be that while most apps will support an alternative, no single format is supported everywhere (xkcd). According to another comment US messaging apps don't support any alternatives, which is enough to keep GIF alive on its own.
Anybody who has compared animated WebM vs animated JPEG XL?
Sadly no. Most browsers don't render static JXL by default yet. Let alone animated. I wish they would. Though for most things regular video transport streams will usually be as good or better. Honestly at this point animated image formats really are kind of a niche and not necessarily super useful at this point. Apng for instance when it was created nearly 20 years ago made some sense. Today now that it's finally getting supported it doesn't make as much sense.
I mean, we don't really need a browser to render it in order to make a performance comparison. But hey, Firefox is getting support for JPEG XL? So there's that, I guess.
Eventually. They've been dancing around it for a long time. Google tried to kill it.
I used to love optimising images in gif format. I would make like 4–30kb memes and animations for my friends in Photoshop CS2. It's actually extremely efficient and lightweight if you do it right… You have cool tools like transparency between frames and unbroken colour blocks don't take any additional storage space. There's nothing wrong with gif.
The problem is how people use them. We take a live action video file and shove it through an automated converter tool that doesn't give a shit about efficiency and will do a complete repaint between frames and use 256+ colour palette. Then you end up with an ugly dithered overcooked piece of shit 50mb 10 second animation. Gif was not designed for this…
Problem is the medium people use to send GIFs to each other doesn’t support any alternatives
I thought the file size was part of the format specification, no?
Yes? I don't really understand the question.
Couldn’t APNG be considered?
I wasn't even aware of APNG or AVIF before this thread. Webm was just the first alternative for GIFs that came to mind.
Looking at this APNG also seems to result in pretty large files whereas AVIF appears to have by far the best compression.
AVIF looks like the best alternative for sending short meme clips to people, which I assume is most peoples use case for GIFs.