Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
JPM

JPEG 2000 Compound Image File Format

image/jpm
VS

PWG Raster Format

image/pwg-raster
PWG-Raster

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

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature JPM PWG-Raster
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading Yes ✕ No
HDR Support ✕ No ✕ No
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
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 →
PWG Raster Format
image/pwg-raster
Extension
.pwg.ras
Container CUPS Raster v2 Container
Compression PackBits (Run-Length Encoding)
Algorithm
PackBits (Apple RLE variant)
Color Depth 1-bit (Monochrome/K), 8-bit (Grayscale), 24-bit (sRGB / Adobe RGB), 32-bit (CMYK)
Developed by IEEE-ISTO Printer Working Group (PWG)
Released 2011
Magic Bytes
52 61 53 32
Full PWG-Raster reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser JPM PWG-Raster
Chrome Chrome
✕ ✕
Firefox Firefox
✕ ✕
Safari Safari
✕ ✕
Edge Edge
✕ ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
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
PWG-Raster

PWG-Raster Strengths

  • The undisputed global standard for modern, driverless printing environments, eliminating the nightmare of installing manufacturer-specific print drivers
  • Extremely lightweight to decode on embedded hardware, requiring minimal RAM buffers on the printer side
  • Strict color space and resolution rules guarantee that the printed output will successfully process without syntax errors
Limitations
  • Generates massive file sizes and network payloads compared to vector-based formats like PDF or PostScript, as every page is fully rasterized at 300+ DPI before transmission
  • No support for native rendering in web browsers, image viewers, or graphic design software without specialized CUPS developer tools
  • Cannot store complex metadata, vector text, or layers

When to choose which format

JPM
Use JPM when…
  • Scanned Document Archiving
  • Mixed Raster Content (MRC) Imaging
  • Digital Libraries
PWG-Raster
Use PWG-Raster when…
  • Driverless Network Printing (IPP Everywhere)
  • Apple AirPrint and Mopria Print Service Pipelines
  • CUPS (Common UNIX Printing System) Spooling

More comparisons

JPM vs ACES → PWG-Raster vs ACES → JPM vs APNG → PWG-Raster vs APNG → JPM vs AVCI → PWG-Raster vs AVCI → JPM vs AVCS → PWG-Raster vs AVCS → JPM vs AVIF → PWG-Raster vs AVIF → All comparisons →
Share this comparison