Image MIME Reference
HTJ2K-(JPH)
High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Image
image/jph
VS
TIFF for Facsimile eXtended
image/tiff-fx
TIFF-FX
A complete technical comparison of High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Image and TIFF for Facsimile eXtended — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.
Equal browser support
Feature Support
| Feature | HTJ2K-(JPH) | TIFF-FX |
|---|---|---|
| Transparency (Alpha) | Yes | ✕ No |
| Animation Support | ✕ No | ✕ No |
| Progressive Loading | Yes | ✕ No |
| HDR Support | Yes | ✕ No |
| EXIF Metadata | Yes | ✕ No |
| ICC Color Profile | Yes | Yes |
High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Image
image/jph
Extension
.jph
Container
JPH (ISO/IEC 15444-15)
Compression
Lossy / Lossless
Algorithm
High-Throughput JPEG 2000 (HTJ2K)
Color Depth
8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 38-bit
Developed by
Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG)
Released
2019
Magic Bytes
00 00 00 0C 6A 50 20 20 0D 0A 87 0A ... 66 74 79 70 6A 70 68 20
TIFF for Facsimile eXtended
image/tiff-fx
Extension
.tiff.tif
Container
TIFF 6.0 Tag Directory Structure
Compression
MH / MR / MMR (CCITT Group 3 & 4) / JBIG / JPEG
Algorithm
CCITT Group 3/4JBIGJPEG
Color Depth
1-bit (Monochrome B&W), 8-bit (Grayscale/Color Indexed), 24-bit (RGB Color)
Developed by
IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force)
Released
1998
Magic Bytes
49 49 2A 00 (Little-Endian) / 4D 4D 00 2A (Big-Endian)
Browser Support Comparison
| Browser | HTJ2K-(JPH) | TIFF-FX |
|---|---|---|
Chrome
|
✕ | ✕ |
Firefox
|
✕ | ✕ |
Safari
|
✕ | ✕ |
Edge
|
✕ | ✕ |
IE (Legacy)
|
✕ | ✕ |
HTJ2K-(JPH)
HTJ2K-(JPH) Strengths
- Delivers orders of magnitude faster encoding and decoding than standard JPEG 2000 by utilizing a new, parallelizable block coder
- Supports mathematically lossless and lossy compression within the same codestream architecture
- Allows for resolution scalability, progressive decoding, and region-of-interest extraction without needing to decode the entire image
Limitations
- Zero native web browser support, requiring specialized libraries, API conversions, or WebAssembly (like OpenJPH.js) for web deployment
- Lack of broad consumer awareness, keeping it confined to professional, medical, and scientific workflows
- Requires more advanced software ecosystems to decode than ubiquitous formats like JPEG or WebP
TIFF-FX
TIFF-FX Strengths
- Provides a universal, standardized format for transmitting multi-page documents over IP networks and email (Internet Fax)
- Supports highly efficient telecom-centric compression algorithms (MMR, JBIG) that produce very small files for text documents
- Maintains backwards compatibility with standard TIFF parsers
Limitations
- Not supported natively by web browsers
- Requires complex parsing of TIFF IFD tags to differentiate a true TIFF-FX file from a standard TIFF file
- Usage is slowly declining as traditional faxing is replaced by secure PDF transmission and e-signature platforms
When to choose which format
HTJ2K-(JPH)
Use HTJ2K-(JPH) when…
- Medical Imaging (DICOM)
- Geospatial Data
- Digital Cinema
- Professional Archiving
TIFF-FX
Use TIFF-FX when…
- Internet Fax (T.37)
- Enterprise Fax Servers
- Document Archiving
- Telecommunications