Image MIME Reference
CMU-Raster
CMU Window Manager Raster
image/x-cmu-raster
VS
JPEG XL
image/jxl
JXL
A complete technical comparison of CMU Window Manager Raster and JPEG XL — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.
JXL wins on browser support
Feature Support
| Feature | CMU-Raster | JXL |
|---|---|---|
| Transparency (Alpha) | ✕ No | Yes |
| Animation Support | ✕ No | Yes |
| Progressive Loading | ✕ No | Yes |
| HDR Support | ✕ No | Yes |
| EXIF Metadata | ✕ No | Yes |
| ICC Color Profile | ✕ No | Yes |
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 XL
image/jxl
Extension
.jxl
Container
ISOBMFF / JPEG XL Codestream
Compression
Lossy (VarDCT) / Lossless (Modular)
Algorithm
VarDCT (Variable block-size DCT)Modular (Predictive coding for lossless)
Color Depth
8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit (Float)
Developed by
Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG)
Released
2021
Magic Bytes
FF 0A (Codestream) / 00 00 00 0C 4A 58 4C 20 0D 0A 87 0A (Container)
Browser Support Comparison
| Browser | CMU-Raster | JXL |
|---|---|---|
Chrome
|
✕ | ✕ |
Firefox
|
✕ | ✕ |
Safari
|
✕ |
✓ 17+
|
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
JXL
JXL Strengths
- Capable of losslessly recompressing legacy JPEG files, saving ~20% space while retaining perfect byte-for-byte restorability
- Highly superior progressive decoding (Saliency-driven), allowing recognizable images to load extremely fast on slow connections
- Outperforms WebP and competes favorably with AVIF, especially at high-fidelity settings and for complex textures/photography
- Royalty-free with an open-source reference implementation (libjxl)
Limitations
- Google's removal of JXL support from Chrome severely hindered its adoption as a universal web standard
- Lack of hardware decoding chips compared to video-derived codecs like AVIF (AV1)
- File parsing logic is complex due to the split between raw codestreams and ISOBMFF containers
When to choose which format
CMU-Raster
Use CMU-Raster when…
- Historical UNIX / Andrew Project Archival
- Legacy Academic Computing Research
JXL
Use JXL when…
- High-End Web Delivery (via Safari/Polyfills)
- HDR Photography
- Legacy JPEG Archiving
- Digital Art & Image Storage