Image MIME Reference
CMU-Raster
CMU Window Manager Raster
image/x-cmu-raster
VS
JPEG-LS
image/jls
JPEG-LS
A complete technical comparison of CMU Window Manager Raster and JPEG-LS — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.
Equal browser support
Feature Support
| Feature | CMU-Raster | JPEG-LS |
|---|---|---|
| Transparency (Alpha) | ✕ No | ✕ No |
| Animation Support | ✕ No | ✕ No |
| Progressive Loading | ✕ No | ✕ No |
| HDR Support | ✕ No | Yes |
| EXIF Metadata | ✕ No | ✕ No |
| ICC Color Profile | ✕ No | ✕ No |
CMU Window Manager Raster
image/x-cmu-raster
Extension
.ras
Container
CMU Window Manager Bitmap
Compression
Uncompressed
Algorithm
None
Color Depth
1-bit (Monochrome), 8-bit (Indexed/Grayscale)
Developed by
Carnegie Mellon University (CMU)
Released
1980s
Magic Bytes
F1 00 40 BB
JPEG-LS
image/jls
Extension
.jls.jl
Container
JPEG Bitstream
Compression
Lossless / Near-Lossless (Predictive Coding)
Algorithm
LOCO-I (Low Complexity Lossless Compression for Images)Golomb-Rice Coding
Color Depth
8-bit, 12-bit, 16-bit (Per Channel)
Developed by
Joint Photographic Experts Group (ISO/ITU-T) & HP Labs
Released
1999
Magic Bytes
FF D8 FF F7
Browser Support Comparison
| Browser | CMU-Raster | JPEG-LS |
|---|---|---|
Chrome
|
✕ | ✕ |
Firefox
|
✕ | ✕ |
Safari
|
✕ | ✕ |
Edge
|
✕ | ✕ |
IE (Legacy)
|
✕ | ✕ |
CMU-Raster
CMU-Raster Strengths
- Incredibly simple, uncompressed binary structure that was easy for early, memory-constrained UNIX workstations to parse and render
Limitations
- Completely obsolete and unsupported outside of niche historical command-line tools like Netpbm
- The shared '.ras' file extension causes frequent file misidentification and system conflicts
- Lacks all modern imaging features, including metadata, compression, and alpha channel transparency
JPEG-LS
JPEG-LS Strengths
- Provides state-of-the-art lossless compression ratios for continuous-tone images, often outperforming Lossless JPEG and JPEG 2000
- Extremely fast and computationally inexpensive to encode/decode, requiring no complex floating-point math or DCTs
- Highly resilient in constrained hardware environments, making it ideal for medical equipment and deep-space probes (e.g., Mars rovers)
Limitations
- Zero native support in web browsers or standard consumer operating systems
- Lacks the advanced resolution scalability and progressive decoding features found in JPEG 2000
- Primarily relegated to niche enterprise sectors (healthcare/DICOM and aerospace) rather than consumer adoption
When to choose which format
CMU-Raster
Use CMU-Raster when…
- Historical UNIX / Andrew Project Archival
- Legacy Academic Computing Research
JPEG-LS
Use JPEG-LS when…
- Medical Imaging (DICOM Encapsulation)
- Space and Planetary Imaging (NASA/ESA)
- Industrial Machine Vision
- Scientific Archival Storage