Image MIME Reference
JPEG-2000
JPEG 2000 Core Image File
image/jp2
VS
Microsoft Document Imaging
image/vnd.ms-modi
MODI
A complete technical comparison of JPEG 2000 Core Image File and Microsoft Document Imaging — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.
JPEG-2000 wins on browser support
Feature Support
| Feature | JPEG-2000 | MODI |
|---|---|---|
| Transparency (Alpha) | Yes | ✕ No |
| Animation Support | ✕ No | ✕ No |
| Progressive Loading | Yes | ✕ No |
| HDR Support | Yes | ✕ No |
| EXIF Metadata | Yes | ✕ No |
| ICC Color Profile | Yes | ✕ No |
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
Microsoft Document Imaging
image/vnd.ms-modi
Extension
.mdi
Container
TIFF Variant
Compression
LZW / Proprietary MS Compression
Algorithm
LZW (Modified)
Color Depth
1-bit (Monochrome), 8-bit (Grayscale), 24-bit (RGB)
Developed by
Microsoft Corporation
Released
2001
Magic Bytes
49 49 2A 00
Browser Support Comparison
| Browser | JPEG-2000 | MODI |
|---|---|---|
Chrome
|
✕ | ✕ |
Firefox
|
✕ | ✕ |
Safari
|
✓ 5+
|
✕ |
Edge
|
✕ | ✕ |
IE (Legacy)
|
✕ | ✕ |
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
MODI
MODI Strengths
- Historically provided an excellent all-in-one scanned document format with built-in OCR and annotations before PDF editing became universally accessible
- Tightly integrated with Microsoft Office and SharePoint workflows in the early 2000s
Limitations
- Completely proprietary and obsolete; Microsoft abandoned it in favor of standard TIFF and PDF
- Causes widespread identification conflicts since its file signature is identical to a standard TIFF
- Extremely difficult to open on modern operating systems without relying on third-party conversion utilities
When to choose which format
JPEG-2000
Use JPEG-2000 when…
- Digital Cinema (DCP)
- Medical Imaging (DICOM)
- Geospatial Data
- Archival Preservation
MODI
Use MODI when…
- Legacy Scanned Document Archival
- Microsoft Office XP/2003/2007 Workflows
- Embedded OCR Text Storage