Coffeehouse Thread

18 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

.PNG

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    jamie

    png png png

    everyone keeps asking for it.

    Is it because:

    - png is distributed royalty free ( open) on linux?
    - png files are smaller?
    - png will let you alpha-blend to desktop?
    - png is scalable ( like svg?)

    I cant say as ive ever exported or come across a need to use them ever..

    my apps will export to this ( portable Network Graphic)

    but what is the benefit? and should i ?

    * i use hi res jpgs most of the time for the clarity

  • User profile image
    lars
  • User profile image
    jamie

    i just tried to make a png my xp wallpaper - wouldnt let me

    "you need active desktop - click here to turn off active desktop"

    think ill stick with jpg - although the file sizes do seem remarkabley better
    * test file - jpg max res 300k  png - 120k

    edit/addition: So its just netscape 4?
    IE opens png files here when i drag them in.. so ie already supports png?

  • User profile image
    lars

    jamie wrote:

    IE opens png files here when i drag them in.. so ie already supports png?


    I think there is a problem with transparency.

  • User profile image
    Manip2

    The thing about PNG images is that in theory they are supposed to be a free GIF replacement (no royalties for PNG creation software). But as the GIF patent(S) have expired it means that both GIF and PNG are completely free it makes PNG less useful overal.

    That said there is nothing wrong with using PNG images apart from less support in some software packages. 

  • User profile image
    jamie

    except that gif is indexed = crappy /bitty - and jpg is smoother - although watery

    so is png - a hybrid ( if it was fully supported)

    what i want is Tif clarity - that i can knockout out edges - like gif - but not so harsh an edge..

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    Manip2 wrote:

    The thing about PNG images is that in theory they are supposed to be a free GIF replacement (no royalties for PNG creation software). But as the GIF patent(S) have expired it means that both GIF and PNG are completely free it makes PNG less useful overal.

    That said there is nothing wrong with using PNG images apart from less support in some software packages. 



    PNG is useful because it has Alpha Transparency support, supports more than 256 colors and is normally smaller than the GIF format. No offense but how does the patent on GIFs expiring change that?

  • User profile image
    Manip2

    Because for 90% of things GIF will work just fine. Before if you ran Linux or used OSS graphics tools (ie Gimp) then you couldn't save to GIF, now you want.. and as your GIF images are more likely to be viewed the way they where drawn you might have well use those.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    i hate gifs.. bitty.. ( although they have their uses * small text images etc)

    so - png = jpg at higher quality - lower size - that you can feather edges to be transparent - unlike gif = just one colour knockout-no feather = alpha-blend - and IE doesnt support it.

    correct?

    * isnt there a jpg format that does this already?

  • User profile image
    Manip2

    But you can't get animated JPG or PNG images.

  • User profile image
    jamie

    so when people say - make IE support png they mean:

    - make the alpha blend work
    - make png able to animate??

    basically - what do all the PNG support requests mean..the above?

  • User profile image
    Manip2

    What? .. ..

    Well anyway..

  • User profile image
    jamie

    - make the alpha blend work
    - make png able to animate

    thats what they mean... for IE

    ?

    and - IF thats what they mean..

    MS People - why is it png was not fully supported in windows/ie ( there must be reasons) and what formats - that can do - aparently - what png can do - do you put forth as replacements if there is something about the png format you dont like? - (hi res alpha - blend for one)

    just trying to understand - whats all the political fuss around png - not so much the tech articles

  • User profile image
    AndyD

    IE support for PNG files is all about alpha blending (which apparently works in the Mac version of IE - go figure). They are not meant to animate at all, though I think there is another format that is a version of PNG that is designed to animate. As there is a well known workaround for the alpha issue I don't think they see it as a high priority to fix (which raises the question as to what the IE team actually do).

    PNGs are cool because they can alpha blend, can have more that 256 colours, have a small file size and are a lossless format. They are just a better version of gifs really, just like XP is a better version of windows than 2000.

  • User profile image
    Manip2

    AndyD wrote:
    (which apparently works in the Mac version of IE - go figure).


    This is a guess.. but if the Mac version of IE uses the local GDI equivalent (rendering engine) and it supports PNG or is updated more often I could see how that could happen.

     

     

  • User profile image
    Shining Arcanine

    Manip2 wrote:
    Because for 90% of things GIF will work just fine. Before if you ran Linux or used OSS graphics tools (ie Gimp) then you couldn't save to GIF, now you want.. and as your GIF images are more likely to be viewed the way they where drawn you might have well use those.


    Of course GIF works fine but that is all it does. It has none of the benefits of the PNG format.

    jamie wrote:
    i hate gifs.. bitty.. ( although they have their uses * small text images etc)

    so - png = jpg at higher quality - lower size - that you can feather edges to be transparent - unlike gif = just one colour knockout-no feather = alpha-blend - and IE doesnt support it.

    correct?

    * isnt there a jpg format that does this already?


    JPEGs use lossless compression. They have no relation to PNGs.

    AndyD wrote:
    They are not meant to animate at all, though I think there is another format that is a version of PNG that is designed to animate.


    Check out MNG, which Microsoft has no support for. -_-

  • User profile image
    Minh

    jamie wrote:

    - png is scalable ( like svg?)


    png is a raster format only -- not vector -- not like SVG.

    jamie wrote:

    * i use hi res jpgs most of the time for the clarity


    Sounds like you're doing digital photos -- so jpg would have an advantage over png (I don't think png supports lossy compression like jpg)

  • User profile image
    theogray_com

    AndyD wrote:
    They are not meant to animate at all, though I think there is another format that is a version of PNG that is designed to animate.


    As I understand it, MSN Messenger uses PNGs with multple frames for the animated emoticons.

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.