Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
JNG

JPEG Network Graphics

image/x-jng
VS

TIFF for Facsimile eXtended

image/tiff-fx
TIFF-FX

A complete technical comparison of JPEG Network Graphics 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 JNG TIFF-FX
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading Yes ✕ No
HDR Support ✕ No ✕ No
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes Yes
JPEG Network Graphics
image/x-jng
Extension
.jng
Container PNG-style Chunk Structure (JHDR, JDAT, IDAT, IEND)
Compression Lossy (JPEG/DCT for color) / Lossless (Deflate for alpha mask)
Algorithm
JPEG (Discrete Cosine Transform)Deflate (LZ77)
Color Depth 8-bit, 12-bit, 24-bit (RGB), 32-bit (RGBA)
Developed by MNG Development Group (Glenn Randers-Pehrson et al.)
Released 2001
Magic Bytes
8B 4A 4E 47 0D 0A 1A 0A
Full JNG reference →
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)
Full TIFF-FX reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser JNG TIFF-FX
Chrome Chrome
✕ ✕
Firefox Firefox
✕ ✕
Safari Safari
✕ ✕
Edge Edge
✕ ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
JNG

JNG Strengths

  • Solved a massive technical hurdle in the early 2000s by combining high-compression lossy photographic data with crisp, 8-bit alpha transparency
  • Utilized the highly robust, extensible chunk-based architecture of the PNG format
  • Provided an excellent, bandwidth-saving alternative to massive 32-bit transparent PNGs for web design
Limitations
  • Failed to achieve critical mass; browser vendors largely abandoned the MNG/JNG standard due to implementation complexity
  • Completely obsolete today, having been superseded by natively supported, superior formats like WebP, AVIF, and HEIC
  • Decoding requires a hybrid engine that can parse PNG chunks while simultaneously decoding a JPEG stream and a Deflate stream, complicating software support
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

JNG
Use JNG when…
  • Embedded frames in MNG animations
  • Historical web graphics requiring lossy compression with transparency
TIFF-FX
Use TIFF-FX when…
  • Internet Fax (T.37)
  • Enterprise Fax Servers
  • Document Archiving
  • Telecommunications

More comparisons

JNG vs ACES → TIFF-FX vs ACES → JNG vs APNG → TIFF-FX vs APNG → JNG vs AVCI → TIFF-FX vs AVCI → JNG vs AVCS → TIFF-FX vs AVCS → JNG vs AVIF → TIFF-FX vs AVIF → All comparisons →
Share this comparison