Huh? The OP literally said “their lossless beats png” and then you proceeded to talk about file size which wasn’t ever part of the conversation. The conversation was about quality.
The only way one lossless algorithm can beat another is in compression size. If one has worse image quality than the other, the worse one isn’t lossless.
But that’s not got anything to do with quality. That’s compression size
Lossless encoding, by definition, won’t have any quality loss.
Watch some startup “invent” a revolutionary lossless format that discards some information.
Xerox did that ages ago.
https://www.dkriesel.com/en/blog/2013/0802_xerox-workcentres_are_switching_written_numbers_when_scanning
Fuuuuuck. There goes another business idea. 😂
That’s the point of revolution, no?
Going back to something that was in the past, except giving it a new name and context:P
Huh? The OP literally said “their lossless beats png” and then you proceeded to talk about file size which wasn’t ever part of the conversation. The conversation was about quality.
The only way one lossless algorithm can beat another is in compression size. If one has worse image quality than the other, the worse one isn’t lossless.