Free webp to jpg
Image MIME Reference
HTJ2K-Codestream

High-Throughput JPEG 2000 Codestream

image/jphc
VS

JPEG 2000 Compound Image File Format

image/jpm
JPM

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

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature HTJ2K-Codestream JPM
Transparency (Alpha) Yes Yes
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading Yes Yes
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
EXIF Metadata ✕ No Yes
ICC Color Profile ✕ No Yes
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 →
JPEG 2000 Compound Image File Format
image/jpm
Extension
.jpm.jpgm
Container ISOBMFF / JPM (ISO/IEC 15444-6)
Compression Lossy / Lossless / Mixed Raster Content (MRC)
Algorithm
JPEG 2000JBIG2JPEGMMR
Color Depth 1-bit (Text/Masks), 8-bit, 16-bit, 24-bit
Developed by Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG)
Released 2003
Magic Bytes
00 00 00 0C 6A 50 20 20 0D 0A 87 0A ... 66 74 79 70 6A 70 6D 20
Full JPM reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser HTJ2K-Codestream JPM
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
JPM

JPM Strengths

  • Highly optimized for scanned documents, drastically reducing file sizes without sacrificing the readability of text or the quality of embedded photos
  • Supports multi-page documents within a single file
  • Object-based architecture allows for complex layout representation and independent extraction of elements
Limitations
  • Failed to achieve widespread adoption, largely being overshadowed by PDF/A and DjVu
  • Zero native web browser compatibility
  • Requires complex, specialized software to properly encode and decode the multi-layered MRC structure

When to choose which format

HTJ2K-Codestream
Use HTJ2K-Codestream when…
  • Medical Imaging Pipelines
  • Geospatial Data Streaming
  • Digital Cinema
  • Embedded Systems
JPM
Use JPM when…
  • Scanned Document Archiving
  • Mixed Raster Content (MRC) Imaging
  • Digital Libraries
Share this comparison