Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
AVIF

AV1 Image File Format

image/avif
VS

JPEG-LS

image/jls
JPEG-LS

A complete technical comparison of AV1 Image File Format and JPEG-LS — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

AVIF wins on browser support

Feature Support

Feature AVIF JPEG-LS
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support Yes ✕ No
Progressive Loading ✕ No ✕ No
HDR Support Yes Yes
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
AV1 Image File Format
image/avif
Extension
.avif
Container HEIF / ISOBMFF
Compression AV1 Lossy / AV1 Lossless
Algorithm
AV1
Color Depth 8-bit, 10-bit, 12-bit
Developed by Alliance for Open Media (AOMedia)
Released 2019
Magic Bytes
XX XX XX XX 66 74 79 70 61 76 69 66
Full AVIF reference →
JPEG-LS
image/jls
Extension
.jls.jl
Container JPEG Bitstream
Compression Lossless / Near-Lossless (Predictive Coding)
Algorithm
LOCO-I (Low Complexity Lossless Compression for Images)Golomb-Rice Coding
Color Depth 8-bit, 12-bit, 16-bit (Per Channel)
Developed by Joint Photographic Experts Group (ISO/ITU-T) & HP Labs
Released 1999
Magic Bytes
FF D8 FF F7
Full JPEG-LS reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser AVIF JPEG-LS
Chrome Chrome
✓ 85+
 ✕
Firefox Firefox
✓ 93+
 ✕
Safari Safari
✓ 16+
 ✕
Edge Edge
✓ 121+
 ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
AVIF

AVIF Strengths

  • Best-in-class compression — typically 20–50% smaller than WebP at equivalent quality
  • Native HDR and wide color gamut (BT.2020) support
  • Supports 8, 10, and 12-bit color depth
Limitations
  • Encoding is highly CPU-intensive — significantly slower than JPEG or WebP
  • Requires Edge 121+ (not supported in earlier Edge versions)
  • Limited support in native desktop image viewers
JPEG-LS

JPEG-LS Strengths

  • Provides state-of-the-art lossless compression ratios for continuous-tone images, often outperforming Lossless JPEG and JPEG 2000
  • Extremely fast and computationally inexpensive to encode/decode, requiring no complex floating-point math or DCTs
  • Highly resilient in constrained hardware environments, making it ideal for medical equipment and deep-space probes (e.g., Mars rovers)
Limitations
  • Zero native support in web browsers or standard consumer operating systems
  • Lacks the advanced resolution scalability and progressive decoding features found in JPEG 2000
  • Primarily relegated to niche enterprise sectors (healthcare/DICOM and aerospace) rather than consumer adoption

When to choose which format

AVIF
Use AVIF when…
  • Next-Gen Websites
  • HDR Photography
  • High-Quality Web Images
JPEG-LS
Use JPEG-LS when…
  • Medical Imaging (DICOM Encapsulation)
  • Space and Planetary Imaging (NASA/ESA)
  • Industrial Machine Vision
  • Scientific Archival Storage

More comparisons

AVIF vs ACES → JPEG-LS vs ACES → AVIF vs APNG → JPEG-LS vs APNG → AVIF vs AVCI → JPEG-LS vs AVCI → AVIF vs AVCS → JPEG-LS vs AVCS → All comparisons →
Share this comparison