Free webp to jpg
Image MIME Reference
HTJ2K-Codestream

High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Codestream

image/jphc
VS

Image Exchange Format

image/ief
IEF

A complete technical comparison of High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Codestream and Image Exchange Format — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature HTJ2K-Codestream IEF
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading Yes ✕ No
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
EXIF Metadata ✕ No ✕ No
ICC Color Profile ✕ No ✕ No
High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Codestream
image/jphc
Extension
.jhc
Container None (Raw Codestream)
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
FF 4F FF 51
Full HTJ2K-Codestream reference →
Image Exchange Format
image/ief
Extension
.ief
Container TIFF Class B (TIFF-B)
Compression Lossless (MH, MR, MMR) / Uncompressed
Algorithm
MHMRMMRUncompressed
Color Depth 1-bit (Monochrome)
Developed by IETF Network Fax Working Group
Released 1992
Magic Bytes
49 49 2A 00 (Little-endian) / 4D 4D 00 2A (Big-endian)
Full IEF reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser HTJ2K-Codestream IEF
Chrome Chrome
Firefox Firefox
Safari Safari
Edge Edge
IE IE (Legacy)
HTJ2K-Codestream

HTJ2K-Codestream Strengths

  • Extremely fast encoding and decoding capabilities due to the parallelizable block coder
  • Minimal file overhead since it lacks container headers and metadata
  • Ideal for streaming applications or embedded systems where parsing a full container is unnecessary
Limitations
  • Lacks standard metadata support (like EXIF, XMP, or ICC color profiles) since there is no container structure
  • Zero native web browser compatibility
  • Difficult to distinguish from standard JPEG 2000 codestreams without deeply parsing the internal marker segments
IEF

IEF Strengths

  • Provided a standard method for exchanging bi-level fax images during the early days of the Internet
  • Supported multi-page documents
  • Leveraged the highly resilient and well-documented TIFF container
Limitations
  • Completely obsolete and unsupported in modern computing environments
  • Strictly limited to 1-bit monochrome data, lacking color or grayscale capabilities
  • Magic bytes overlap completely with standard TIFF, making specific filetype detection difficult without parsing internal tags

When to choose which format

HTJ2K-Codestream
Use HTJ2K-Codestream when…
  • Medical Imaging Pipelines
  • Geospatial Data Streaming
  • Digital Cinema
  • Embedded Systems
IEF
Use IEF when…
  • Legacy Fax Transmissions
  • Early Internet Gateways
  • Archival
Share this comparison