Free webp to jpg
EN
Image MIME Reference
PWG-Raster

PWG Raster Format

image/pwg-raster
VS

TIFF for Facsimile eXtended

image/tiff-fx
TIFF-FX

A complete technical comparison of PWG Raster Format and TIFF for Facsimile eXtended — covering compression, feature support, browser compatibility, magic bytes, and when to choose each format.

Equal browser support

Feature Support

Feature PWG-Raster TIFF-FX
Transparency (Alpha) ✕ No ✕ No
Animation Support ✕ No ✕ No
Progressive Loading ✕ No ✕ No
HDR Support ✕ No ✕ No
EXIF Metadata ✕ No ✕ No
ICC Color Profile ✕ No Yes
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 →
TIFF for Facsimile eXtended
image/tiff-fx
Extension
.tiff.tif
Container TIFF 6.0 Tag Directory Structure
Compression MH / MR / MMR (CCITT Group 3 & 4) / JBIG / JPEG
Algorithm
CCITT Group 3/4JBIGJPEG
Color Depth 1-bit (Monochrome B&W), 8-bit (Grayscale/Color Indexed), 24-bit (RGB Color)
Developed by IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force)
Released 1998
Magic Bytes
49 49 2A 00 (Little-Endian) / 4D 4D 00 2A (Big-Endian)
Full TIFF-FX reference →

Browser Support Comparison

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

TIFF-FX Strengths

  • Provides a universal, standardized format for transmitting multi-page documents over IP networks and email (Internet Fax)
  • Supports highly efficient telecom-centric compression algorithms (MMR, JBIG) that produce very small files for text documents
  • Maintains backwards compatibility with standard TIFF parsers
Limitations
  • Not supported natively by web browsers
  • Requires complex parsing of TIFF IFD tags to differentiate a true TIFF-FX file from a standard TIFF file
  • Usage is slowly declining as traditional faxing is replaced by secure PDF transmission and e-signature platforms

When to choose which format

PWG-Raster
Use PWG-Raster when…
  • Driverless Network Printing (IPP Everywhere)
  • Apple AirPrint and Mopria Print Service Pipelines
  • CUPS (Common UNIX Printing System) Spooling
TIFF-FX
Use TIFF-FX when…
  • Internet Fax (T.37)
  • Enterprise Fax Servers
  • Document Archiving
  • Telecommunications

More comparisons

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