• .PNG versus .JPG versus .BMP- a guide
    101 replies, posted
My favorite is .png. Lossless, transparency, and can do animations. (.apng) Hell, my avatar is only 3.46 KB.
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;16232153]Your avatar is perfect for the quote. I never got around to making the .BMP file. I suppose I should have. You see, I edit the Wikia Assassin's Creed Wiki and this guy uploaded a .PNG file of the Animus. But it was reduced in resolution from the original version, because the original was like 1 MB and the uploader apparently didn't know how to use .JPG compression. I guess I'll go make the .PNG into a BMP and see what I get. [B]EDIT:[/B] The PNG was 1.1 MB. The BMP was 2.6 MB. I'll edit that into the OP.[/QUOTE] oh, you mean my .png avatar?
There's also the JNG (JPEG Network Graphics) format which nobody uses, JPEG image data with a PNG alpha channel (And I think the image data was then compressed the same way PNG images are, but I'm not sure) Edit: No, I was wrong, you could compress the alpha channel using JPEG compression, not the other way around.
PNG, TGA, and DDS are what I regularly use. I don't give a shit about filesize unless I'm uploading, then PNG.
I usually use .png and sometimes .jpg. I rarely ever use .bmp, however.
[QUOTE=proboardslol;16232636]I use: DDS Targa PNG TIF Except nobody uses them, and the format is never used :([/QUOTE] DDS is for textures, I have no idea what Targa is for, and nobody uses TIF anymore.
The most complex thread on one of the simplest subjects.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;16233085]DDS is for textures, I have no idea what Targa is for, and nobody uses TIF anymore.[/QUOTE] Targa = TGA
Not all JPGs have compression. If you just save them in photoshop at high quality there's no visible compression.
[QUOTE=Uberslug;16233178]Not all JPGs have compression. If you just save them in photoshop at high quality there's no visible compression.[/QUOTE] There's compression, just not lossy compression. That's what this thread was all about.
If you want to increase the lossless compression of your PNG files, you can use a tool like [url=http://advsys.net/ken/utils.htm]PNGOUT[/url] (this is available as an option in the latest IrfanView). This works best for images with simple colours; I recompressed the photographic PNG in the OP, and it went from 1079 KB down to 1001 KB, not much difference. Most image editors use a low level of compression with PNG because calculating the best lossless compression takes a while.
[QUOTE=Bredirish123;16231981].png 4 lyfe.[/QUOTE] same as ma homie here!
PNG for the win
.bmp are for sprites.
Very nice. I was never sure of this prior to this thread, but I thought I knew some of it. It's like I'm studying for life. :buddy:
[QUOTE=dgjsk3;16232820]oh, you mean my .png avatar?[/QUOTE] I was referring to it being Ryder in your avatar.
.cr2 shit yeah .png is good too.
I hate it when people use .bmp for anything, there's no point in it.
You really like the word tremendous!
[QUOTE=Wootman;16233401].bmp are for sprites.[/QUOTE] no .tga is for sprites
this is an example of a .png. the bad quality is due to it being from justin.tv. [img]http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c284/Giac_Jr/hurr2.png[/img]
Side note: PNG supports alpha channels.
BMPs are not just the same as PNG with a bigger size. PNGs can only use around 4 million indexed colors, BMPs use the (depending on type) full 24bit spectrum*. However, that difference is not significant. *32bit BMPs can also include alpha.
jpeg is the best for solid colours.
Actually, I don't think BMP's better in terms of compatibility.
But what about animated PNGs? That's the big thing now.
You forgot RAW and other advantages of PNG (alpha channels for example)
[QUOTE=smurfy;16241909]But what about animated PNGs? That's the big thing now.[/QUOTE] aPNG is like png, but it moves. Nothing much here
[QUOTE=Bredirish123;16231981].png 4 lyfe.[/QUOTE] representin' yo
I use Paint.NET instead of paint anyway, paint won't let you optimize JPEG compression. So, uncompressed JPG: [IMG]http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f180/BJK51/tablem-1.jpg[/IMG] Uncompressed PNG: [IMG]http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f180/BJK51/tablem.png[/IMG] Do you see the difference? There isn't any quality wise. Also bitmaps load from the bottom up. :buddy:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.