Free webp to jpg
Image MIME Reference
IEF

Image Exchange Format

image/ief
VS

JPEG 2000 Core Image File

image/jp2
JPEG-2000

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

JPEG-2000 wins on browser support

Feature Support

Feature IEF JPEG-2000
Transparency (Alpha) ✕ No Yes
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading ✕ No Yes
HDR Support ✕ No Yes
EXIF Metadata ✕ No Yes
ICC Color Profile ✕ No Yes
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 →
JPEG 2000 Core Image File
image/jp2
Extension
.jp2.j2k.jpf.jpx.jpm
Container JP2 (ISO/IEC 15444-1)
Compression Lossy / Lossless
Algorithm
Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT)
Color Depth 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 38-bit
Developed by Joint Photographic Experts Group
Released 2000
Magic Bytes
00 00 00 0C 6A 50 20 20 0D 0A 87 0A
Full JPEG-2000 reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser IEF JPEG-2000
Chrome Chrome
Firefox Firefox
Safari Safari
✓ 5+
Edge Edge
IE IE (Legacy)
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
JPEG-2000

JPEG-2000 Strengths

  • Superior compression efficiency over baseline JPEG without introducing blocking artifacts
  • True mathematically lossless compression available in the same format
  • Extremely scalable: a single file can be decoded at various resolutions (thumbnails to full size) without loading the entire file
Limitations
  • Very poor native web browser support prevents it from being a web standard
  • High computational complexity makes encoding and decoding significantly slower than JPEG
  • Early patent concerns and complex licensing hindered its initial adoption rate

When to choose which format

IEF
Use IEF when…
  • Legacy Fax Transmissions
  • Early Internet Gateways
  • Archival
JPEG-2000
Use JPEG-2000 when…
  • Digital Cinema (DCP)
  • Medical Imaging (DICOM)
  • Geospatial Data
  • Archival Preservation
Share this comparison