Hello, just wanted to check. I don’t think it is as it doesn’t appear that Responsive Images are being served for my AVIF images on mobile devices, is that right? So the Responsive Images feature doesn’t support AVIF? I’ve noticed that AVIF is not mentioned here in the FAQ but I wondered whether it was just out of date. Thanks.
Interesting. In my experience AVIF’s avg. 1/20th the size of a JPG at the same dimensions, so perhaps it’s just not worth the savings to create smaller responsive versions? Saves some complexities as well.
But also, AVIFs can be animated and it’s unlikely that would translate well in a resize.
You might ask support what their reasoning is.
AVIF is smaller than JPG, of course. But so is WEBP. Smaller images will always have a smaller file size, regardless of the format.
Not sure on what you mean about animation, sorry.
IMO it is because it is a new format and WF still waiting for wider use as .webp is a “standard” for now. AVIF is fully supported in all major browsers from Jan 2024 (latest was Edge) . AVIF is approx 40% smaller than WebP with better quality, but do visitors really see the difference?
When it comes to what format to use it all depend on audience of website. If your visitors are “techy” and always use latest browser version the .avif can be your format to go.
IMO WF didn’t mentioned .avif as it still very “fresh” format to all browsers and that is why is still not supported. It may change later or sooner.
image sizing for src happens on compile time and than is served based on what device access your website … this is way beyond this conversation.
For now I will recommend using .webp as WF support it.
Other option is use external services that support .avif and can serve optimised image for given device.
Sounds sensible, I’ll avoid use of AVIF, in that case. Thanks!