Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
JPM

JPEG 2000 Compound Image File Format

image/jpm
VS

Valve Texture Format

image/vnd.valve.source.texture
VTF

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

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature JPM VTF
Transparency (Alpha) Yes Yes
Animation Support ✕ No Yes
Progressive Loading Yes ✕ No
HDR Support ✕ No Yes
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 →
Valve Texture Format
image/vnd.valve.source.texture
Extension
.vtf
Container Valve Texture Format Header
Compression DXTC (DXT1, DXT3, DXT5) / Uncompressed (BGRA8888, RGB888, etc.)
Algorithm
DXT1-DXT5None
Color Depth 8-bit, 24-bit (RGB), 32-bit (RGBA), 16-bit Floating Point (HDR)
Developed by Valve Corporation
Released 2004
Magic Bytes
56 54 46 00
Full VTF reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser JPM VTF
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
VTF

VTF Strengths

  • Extremely fast loading within the Source Engine because the block-compressed data goes directly into the GPU's VRAM without CPU decompression overhead
  • Bundles mipmaps, volumetric slices, cubemap faces, and animation frames entirely within a single file
  • Openly documented by the Valve Developer Community, leading to a massive ecosystem of third-party modding tools
Limitations
  • Strictly tied to the Source Engine ecosystem; entirely useless in standard web or print contexts
  • No native support in standard image editors without hunting down and installing specialized plugins
  • Block compression algorithms (DXT) are lossy and can cause visible artifacting, especially on normal maps or smooth gradients

When to choose which format

JPM
Use JPM when…
  • Scanned Document Archiving
  • Mixed Raster Content (MRC) Imaging
  • Digital Libraries
VTF
Use VTF when…
  • Source Engine Game Textures
  • Custom Maps and Modding (Garry's Mod, CS:GO)
  • Animated In-Game Decals and Sprays
  • Environment Cubemaps (Skyboxes)

More comparisons

JPM vs ACES → VTF vs ACES → JPM vs APNG → VTF vs APNG → JPM vs AVCI → VTF vs AVCI → JPM vs AVCS → VTF vs AVCS → JPM vs AVIF → VTF vs AVIF → All comparisons →
Share this comparison