Jump to content
jacmaes

Webp support

Recommended Posts

One of PW 3.010's major novelty was the introduction of Horst's new image resizing engine that uses ImageMagick. Now I understand that ImageMagick can convert images to Webp, the image format that Google says can reduce image size up to 34% compared to JPEG.

Mozilla is apparently adding support to Firefox, and even the Safari team is playing with it, so it looks like Webp is soon going to be available in most major browsers. If Horst's module can be extended to add Webp conversion, that would be a great addition to PW's already very powerful image manipulation arsenal. 

I'm currently using the free ImageEngine Lite to serve Webp images to supporting browsers, and the results are impressive. I routinely get images that are between 25 and 60% smaller compared to JPEG, with the same visual quality. I would love to eliminate the need to rely on a third-party service though. 

  • Like 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any update on this, doesn't look like many of the browsers have followed the google team by implementing. Love to have a simply solution for converting to webp in PW too if that might be available, even if its for opera and chrome users. something like

image->size(1000,0,"webp");

or

webp = image->convert("webp")

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need WebP support in the core as it only has advantages (and one disadvantage): Edge (yes, Edge) supports it, as well as Chrome, the Android Browser (since 4.2) and Opera. Firefox 65 which will be released in January 2019 will implement it very soon and the Safari team is also experimenting with it.

The disadvantage is, that images that are being downloaded can not be opened with standard OS applications, but with tools like IrfanView or XnView you can also view WebP files. This makes it also hard to share these images and is why Facebook removed WebP from their service, as people tend to download and share the images. But I think thats not the case for most websites. And also it is a decision of the developer, if he uses WebP or another image format. So we have no drawbacks if this would be in the core (or a module, but I don't see why it should be a module).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some thoughts / infos in no special order:

it has to be a module because all our image engines are modules. 

As long as the GD library does not support webp, it cannot be a core fileformat. 

I haven't tested anything in regard of webp til now. If imagick supports it as outputformat, I can start testing it as a image engine module that extends the core imagick module to provide something like a options variable to return the final variation image as webp. 

Earliest start can be around christmas time 2018. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, horst said:

As long as the GD library does not support webp, it cannot be a core fileformat.

GD supports webp: http://php.net/manual/en/image.installation.php

Quote

To enable support for webp add --with-vpx-dir=DIR . Available as of PHP 5.5. As of PHP 7.0.0 --with-webp-dir=DIR has to be added, i.e. support for libvpx has been removed in favor of libwebp.

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Beluga said:

GD supports webp

Ah, a quick test showed that I can use this already with my local dev environment:

$cai3 = $page->croppable_images->first()->getCrop('thumb100');
// WebP with GD-lib bundled with PHP 7
$im = imagecreatefromjpeg($cai3->filename);
imagewebp($im, str_replace('.jpg', '.webp', $cai3->filename));
imagedestroy($im);

😄

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@horst Niiiice! I've just tried on a live server with PHP 7.2 installed. Your code works great. The Webp image is successfully generated from the original JPEG. Here's how I've echoed it:

 

		$main_image = $page->image->first->getCrop('grande'); // (using Horst's Croppable Image module in this example)
		$image = imagecreatefromjpeg($main_image->filename);
		imagewebp($image, str_replace('.jpg', '.webp', $main_image->filename));
		imagedestroy($image);
		$webp_image = str_replace('.jpg', '.webp', $main_image->url);
		echo "<img class='responsive-image' src='$webp_image' alt=''>";

 

Note: for those using the Plesk control panel, webp support for GD seems to be disabled by default.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably not news to anyone familiar with webp, but I just tried it and the reduction in file size is impressive indeed. WEBP image on the left generated from variation with 100% quality, JPG on the right with default PW quality setting. Interesting that there is a slight but perceptible difference in colour though.

2018-11-30_110000.jpg.b49940d9d841016dac1502d725c45561.jpg

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What we really will need is to detect if a browser supports it. 

If someone knows about workarounds, polyfills or others, please drop links here. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, horst said:

If someone knows about workarounds, polyfills or others, please drop links here.

This seems like a pretty good approach to both inline and CSS images: https://css-tricks.com/using-webp-images/

For inline images in a textarea a textformatter module could prepare the picture/srcset.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, there are ways to use webp as progressive enhancement, so there's no need to detect browser support on the server side.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, Webp is impressive.

This is my dinner from the day before yesterday.

The JPEG (2394 x 1671 px) has 1.8 MiB, the Webp has 150.9 KiB

wizardl.webp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@arjen the support via lazyload sounds very interesting. This way we only have to care that both fileformats are available on the server. There is no extra markup needed. Only downside is the missing noscript support. So the usefulness depends on the usecase. 

😀

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Want to announce that I started with embedding support for the WebP format into the core.

Current state in my dev-branch is, that you can call / create additional image variations in the WebP format by passing this param within an options array to any size call:

// mandatory is: 'webpAdd' => true
// optionally define a quality for WebP: 'webpQuality' => 80
// currrently it only is implemented in the GD-Engine, so you need to force its use,

$options = [
    'forceEngine' => 'ImageSizerEngineGD',
    'forceNew' => true,
    'webpAdd' => true,
    'webpQuality' => 80
    ];
$image = $page->images->first->size(700, 700, $options);

 

If you want to be an early tester, you can get a fork from here (patch-1), or you grap these three files:

More will be done between christmas and new year!

 

screen-webp-start.thumb.jpg.20d914371b40284314569ff6746627fd.jpg

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can we make the api a bit more flexible like:

$options = [
  'additionalFormats': ['webp'],
  'webp' => [
    'quality' => 80
  ]
];

This way we can easily add any other formats, which might emerge and have the possibility to not only have a single additional format generated. And as soon as we might generate multiple formats / images per sizing operation I feel like namespacing options like quality might prevent an explosion of possible root level options.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LostKobrakai said:

Can we make the api a bit more flexible

I believe that this would need a huge rewriting of the complete images files (Pageimage and the SizerEngines). My first thought also was to enhance it to use different outputformats, as you can read above, (or maybe only in the github issues).

But with this first take, I definetly want to use only webp and only as a sidecar file. Other things, like selectable and multiple outputformats are not in the first line.

Thats because I have not that much time atm to start a huge rewrite, but want to have the compression advantage of webp integrated directly in PW, as this will be the first possibility included in the core, without usage of external tools and also without extra manipulation steps. And for that purpose, it seems to me enough to implement just another single param.

 

1 hour ago, LostKobrakai said:

This way we can easily add any other formats, which might emerge and have the possibility to not only have a single additional format generated

It will be definetly not "easily", as the imagesizer was and is designed to only resize and crop a single image. It is not an image manipulator. And the todo work not will be the ImageSizerEngines but the Pageimage.php, the tempfiles generation and how all this currently works together.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@horst As you wrote the webP will be generated in addition to the normal resized image, is that correct? 

How would I echo the different formats? Are there different URLs for the normal jpg image and another URL for the WebP image?

For example to use it in a picture element like I discribed in the Github issue

<picture>
  <source srcset="{$image->size(700,700,$options)->url('webp')}" type="image/webp">
  <source srcset="{$image->size(700,700,$options)->url}" type="image/jpeg"> 
  <img src="{$image->url}" alt="Alt Text!">
</picture>

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Current state is that only the images are created and removed.

There is no markup generation or additional url output implemented yet. But will be added soon.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, horst said:

But with this first take, I definetly want to use only webp and only as a sidecar file.

That's totally fine. We could simply not support different formats besides webp for now. I was really just talking about the configuration, so if there is time in the future to have a more extensive featureset supported we don't need to change the configuration, but can just add the features / remove warnings.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LostKobrakai said:

I was really just talking about the configuration, so if there is time in the future to have a more extensive featureset supported we don't need to change the configuration, but can just add the features / remove warnings.

That's the part that is bound to the Pageimage class. Maybe it could be takled by a little extra layer / function, that maps a new configuration API to the old cryptic one, as I do with PIA and her selector strings?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jmartsch said:

How would I echo the different formats?

With a hook in site/ready.php like this one,

// hook for pageimages to return a webp url
$wire->addHookProperty('Pageimage::urlWebp', function($event) {
    $image = $event->object;
    $path_parts = pathinfo($image->filename);
    $webpFilename = $path_parts['dirname'] . '/' . $path_parts['filename'] . '.webp';
    if(!is_readable($webpFilename)) {
        $event->return = '#';  // what should be returned for none existing webp variations ?
        return;
    }
    $path_parts = pathinfo($image->url);
    $webpUrl = $path_parts['dirname'] . '/' . $path_parts['filename'] . '.webp';
    $event->return = $webpUrl;
});

you can use it for testing purposes right now.

screen-webp-url-property.jpg.69c6dc0d25b51bc9bd6245632480a563.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By EyeDentify
      Hello Dear PW Gurus.

      Hope you fair well in these Corona Crisis times.

      Anyhow, i have a problem with a Cryptic error message that shows up when i am trying to Delete images out of a Images field.
      The Error message does say a little but it does not make sense to me why i can´t delete the images because of it.

      Is it some permission issue perhaps?

      I will attach screenshots of it and what i did prior to it.
      I am from sweden so ignore the funny words here and there.

      Hope you all can send me on the right track.
      i am running PW 3.0.139 on this install.

      Step1:

      Step 2: Select the images with the trashcan symbol

       
      Step 3: Cryptic Error message

      I am scratching my head on this one, have not seen this before.

      Thankfull for all help.
      /EyeDentify
    • By Guy Incognito
      This short script loops through some images from an XML feed and pushes new ones to an image field. It all works perfectly, except for some reason the last image (only) in the loop each time doesn't receive the image description... can everyone spot why? TIA! 🙂 
      foreach ($propertyImages as $img) { $fileName = trim($img[0]); if ( !empty($fileName) ) { $imgPath = '../property_data/'.$fileName; if(file_exists($imgPath) && !in_array(strtolower($fileName),$currentImages)) { $p->property_images->add($imgPath); $p->save(); $newImg = $p->property_images->last(); $newImg->description = $img[1]; $p->save(); } } }  
    • By eutervogel
      Hi, 
      what I'm doing is this:
       
      <picture> <source srcset="<?php echo $page->section_three->main_img->first()->size(396,710)->webp->url; ?>" type="image/webp"> <img class="p_absoulte pp_block" src="<?php echo $page->section_three->main_img->first()->size(396,710)->url; ?>" alt=""> </picture> and for some reason it sometimes becomes this:
      <picture> <source srcset="/site/assets/files/1057/sektion3_bild-1.396x710.png" type="image/webp"> <img class="p_absoulte pp_block" src="/site/assets/files/1057/sektion3_bild-1.396x710.png" alt=""> </picture> It seems to be related to ->size(). When I don't use ->size() the webp Url is correct.
      I'm using the image-field inside a Fieldset(Page). Could that be a problem too?
      I just increased the output size by 2px and voila the webp url comes up. 
      I deleted all variations (webp variation is present in correct size) changed it back to the original size and again: a png url.

      I also tried to rename the image and load it up agian. 
      ...same behavoir.
      Thanks in advance guys
       
    • By Peter Knight
      Is anyone here using WEBP as their output image format and what is your server / environment setup?
       I know there's support for it in PW lately and decided to investigate.
      Found it quite difficult to do this on a practical level. IE My current VPS is Cent OS 6 and Plesk and unless I'm wrong, WEBP is not supported by either.
      Which host and setup are you on that allows you to run WebP?
      Cheers
    • By Robin S
      Add Image URLs
      Allows images/files to be added to Image/File fields by pasting URLs.

      Usage
      Install the Add Image URLs module.
      A "Paste URLs" button will be added to all image and file fields. Use the button to show a textarea where URLs may be pasted, one per line. Images/files are added when the page is saved.
       
      https://github.com/Toutouwai/AddImageUrls
      https://modules.processwire.com/modules/add-image-urls/
×
×
  • Create New...