Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
JPM

JPEG 2000 Compound Image File Format

image/jpm
VS

Extended Image File Format

image/vnd.xiff
XIFF

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

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature JPM XIFF
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 →
Extended Image File Format
image/vnd.xiff
Extension
.xif
Container TIFF-based Proprietary Container
Compression CCITT Group 3 / Group 4 / LZW / Uncompressed
Algorithm
CCITT Group 4LZWNone
Color Depth 1-bit (Monochrome), 8-bit (Grayscale), 24-bit (RGB)
Developed by Keyfile Corporation
Released 1994
Magic Bytes
49 49 2A 00 or 4D 4D 00 2A
Full XIFF reference →

Browser Support Comparison

Browser JPM XIFF
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
XIFF

XIFF Strengths

  • Pioneered early enterprise document workflow integration by binding administrative routing data directly to the document image file
  • Leveraged efficient fax compression standards to keep storage requirements low on 1990s server infrastructure
Limitations
  • Completely proprietary and obsolete; Keyfile Corporation's software ecosystem no longer exists
  • Causes widespread MIME type identification conflicts due to sharing the exact same binary header signature as standard TIFF files
  • Zero support in modern operating systems or web browsers

When to choose which format

JPM
Use JPM when…
  • Scanned Document Archiving
  • Mixed Raster Content (MRC) Imaging
  • Digital Libraries
XIFF
Use XIFF when…
  • Keyfile Enterprise Document Management
  • Legacy Corporate Workflow Archival
  • Scanned Multi-page Document Routing

More comparisons

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