Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
JPX

JPEG 2000 Part 2 (Extended)

image/jpx
VS

PWG Raster Format

image/pwg-raster
PWG-Raster

A complete technical comparison of JPEG 2000 Part 2 (Extended) and PWG Raster Format — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature JPX PWG-Raster
Transparency (Alpha) Yes ✕ No
Animation Support Yes ✕ No
Progressive Loading Yes ✕ No
HDR Support Yes ✕ No
EXIF Metadata Yes ✕ No
ICC Color Profile Yes ✕ No
JPEG 2000 Part 2 (Extended)
image/jpx
Extension
.jpx.jpf
Container ISOBMFF / JPX (ISO/IEC 15444-2)
Compression Lossy / Lossless
Algorithm
Discrete Wavelet Transform (DWT)
Color Depth 8-bit, 16-bit, 32-bit, 38-bit
Developed by Joint Photographic Experts Group (JPEG)
Released 2002
Magic Bytes
00 00 00 0C 6A 50 20 20 0D 0A 87 0A ... 66 74 79 70 6A 70 78 20
Full JPX 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 JPX PWG-Raster
Chrome Chrome
✕ ✕
Firefox Firefox
✕ ✕
Safari Safari
✕ ✕
Edge Edge
✕ ✕
IE IE (Legacy)
✕ ✕
JPX

JPX Strengths

  • Removes the color space limitations of baseline JP2, adding native support for CMYK, CIE Lab, and custom vendor color spaces
  • Supports multiple codestreams in a single file, allowing for rich compositing and animation
  • Enables fragmented files where image data and metadata can reside in separate physical files via data references
Limitations
  • Extremely complex specification makes full software implementation rare, leading to compatibility issues
  • Zero web browser support, rendering it unsuitable for public internet distribution
  • Often overkill for standard imaging tasks where baseline JP2 or modern alternatives like AVIF suffice
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

JPX
Use JPX when…
  • Prepress & Commercial Printing (CMYK)
  • Geospatial Data
  • Archival Preservation
  • Medical Imaging
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

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