Ironically, on non-graphics material, most lossless video encoders beat PNG, too. FFV1 is particularly good at grainy images, and is probably quite difficult to beat without either a much fancier predictor (e.g. LPC instead of median) or much more costly entropy coding (context mixing).
http://gitorious.org/imagezero/imagezero/blobs/master/pixel....
Without comments the specifics are still somewhat mysterious, though.
From the Features page: "The current release of OpenEXR supports several lossless compression methods, some of which can achieve compression ratios of about 2:1 for images with film grain. OpenEXR is extensible, so developers can easily add new compression methods (lossless or lossy)."
Is this in reference to paq [1]? Are there any other really good compressors that are too slow?
In practice, the competitions that people like to use to measure which compressor is “best” have resource limits, and compressors from the PAQ family are at or near the top of most rankings.
http://mattmahoney.net/dc/text.html has some nice charts of the Pareto frontier for at least one competition. This lets you see the most efficient compressor for a given compression ratio and vice versa. The log scale gives a sense of the diminishing returns: it’s really easy to compress most structured data to 0.5 its original size, but getting from say 0.214 to 0.213 can be a hell of a lot of work.
http://encode.ru/threads/1471-iz-New-fast-lossless-RGB-photo...
They tried it on the same benchmark as this list
http://www.imagecompression.info/gralic/LPCB.html
Of course it's meaningless without the time to decompress on there but it has to be done on the same machine as the master benchmark list.