Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
AVIF

AV1 Image File Format

image/avif
VS

North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax

image/naplps
NAPLPS

A complete technical comparison of AV1 Image File Format and North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

AVIF wins on browser support

Feature Support

Feature AVIF NAPLPS
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support Yes Yes
Progressive Loading ✕ No Yes
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
AV1 Image File Format
image/avif
Extension
.avif
Container HEIF / ISOBMFF
Compression AV1 Lossy / AV1 Lossless
Algorithm
AV1
Color Depth 8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit
Developed by Alliance for Open Media (AOMedia)
Released 2019
Magic Bytes
XX XX XX XX 66 74 79 70 61 76 69 66
Full AVIF reference →
North American Presentation Level Protocol Syntax
image/naplps
Extension
.nap.naplps
Container NAPLPS Byte Stream
Compression Uncompressed (Tokenized ASCII Commands)
Algorithm
None (Coordinate encoding)
Color Depth 16-color palette (Indexed from larger color spaces)
Developed by ANSI / CSA (Based on Canadian CRC's Telidon)
Released 1983
Magic Bytes
1B (Variable / ESC sequences)
Full NAPLPS reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser AVIF NAPLPS
Chrome Chrome
✓ 85+
 ✕
Firefox Firefox
✓ 93+
 ✕
Safari Safari
✓ 16+
 ✕
Edge Edge
✓ 121+
 ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
AVIF

AVIF Strengths

  • Best-in-class compression — typically 20–50% smaller than WebP at equivalent quality
  • Native HDR and wide color gamut (BT.2020) support
  • Supports 8, 10, and 12-bit color depth
Limitations
  • Encoding is highly CPU-intensive — significantly slower than JPEG or WebP
  • Requires Edge 121+ (not supported in earlier Edge versions)
  • Limited support in native desktop image viewers
NAPLPS

NAPLPS Strengths

  • Extremely bandwidth-efficient, enabling colorful graphical interfaces over early 300 baud dial-up connections
  • Resolution-independent vector scaling allowed the exact same file to be displayed accurately on varied early PC monitors and television sets
Limitations
  • Completely obsolete and unsupported by modern web technologies
  • Relies heavily on stateful parsing and terminal emulators rather than straightforward file decoding
  • Easily misidentified by MIME sniffers as plain text or generic binary streams due to the lack of a standardized file header

When to choose which format

AVIF
Use AVIF when…
  • Next-Gen Websites
  • HDR Photography
  • High-Quality Web Images
NAPLPS
Use NAPLPS when…
  • 1980s Videotex Services
  • Prodigy Online Service Graphics
  • Historical BBS Terminal Graphics
  • Legacy Teletext Broadcasts

More comparisons

AVIF vs ACES → NAPLPS vs ACES → AVIF vs APNG → NAPLPS vs APNG → AVIF vs AVCI → NAPLPS vs AVCI → AVIF vs AVCS → NAPLPS vs AVCS → All comparisons →
Share this comparison