[QUOTE=Chris122990;21400377][B]HAHAHAHAHAHAHA[/B]
You think you're [B]SO CLEVER[/B] by saving the pic, converting it to a jpg, and then being like [B][I]HURR DURR LOOK AT TPYE LOLOLOLOL.[/I][/B]
Seriously, if you're going to try and pull that, CHANGE THE PIC THAT YOU QUOTED!!!
IT STILL HAS PNG IN IT!!!
Dumbass.[/QUOTE]
No need to shout, why do you think I wanted to let it look like he used jpg?
I wanted to show both look the same if you do it right.
Who is the dumbass now?
No, they don't look the same. I can see artifacting on your jpg version.
Behold:
[IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s297/Chris122990/JPGsucks.png[/IMG]
My apologies for the size, img_thumb doesn't seem to be working.
jpg was great, once upon a time... when the internet was so slow it was all we could afford to watch load. :/
[QUOTE=Chris122990;21400619]No, they don't look the same. I can see artifacting on your jpg version.
Behold:
My apologies for the size, img_thumb doesn't seem to be working.[/QUOTE]
So you insult me, don't get what I mean, read my response, upload a picture of 2 pictures which look exactly the same (YES, WHERE ARE THE ARTIFACTS IN THE JPEG VERSION? I CAN'T SEE THEM) and think you get along with it? Prepare for boxes.
[QUOTE=WeltEnSTurm;21400693]Prepare for boxes.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=WeltEnSTurm;21400693]Prepare for boxes.[/QUOTE]
do ho ho I'm so clever responding with a quote of a quote.
although, I couldn't really see the differences, your swap-to-jpg wasn't very innovative. Did you do it with photoshop, too?
[QUOTE=WeltEnSTurm;21400693]So you insult me, don't get what I mean, read my response, upload a picture of 2 pictures which look exactly the same (YES, WHERE ARE THE ARTIFACTS IN THE JPEG VERSION? I CAN'T SEE THEM) and think you get along with it? Prepare for boxes.[/QUOTE]
Since I don't want to page stretch:
[URL]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s297/Chris122990/JPGsucks2.png[/URL]
I have pointed out [B]SOME [/B]of the artifacts for you.
[QUOTE=Chris122990;21400820]Since I don't want to page stretch:
[URL]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s297/Chris122990/JPGsucks2.png[/URL]
I have pointed out [B]SOME [/B]of the artifacts for you.[/QUOTE]
to show this better, I tossed it into PS and brought out the curves to an extreme contrast. This is what happens when those guys on CSI say "enhance the image". I didn't rotate 90 and zoom in on sector 4, but it works.
[img_thumb]http://www.cubeupload.com/files/77e400omgpng.png[/img_thumb]
...also, img_thumb SEEMS to be working. some people are complaining about it. :raise: ...either way, click the picture.
OH GOD THE JPG RAPE!!!
Anyway, in the interest of contributing something funny:
[IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s297/Chris122990/1644.png[/IMG]
^That is #3 on my list of reasons to read QC.
[QUOTE=Nintendo-Guy;21389595][img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-1.jpg?w=500&h=350[/img]
[img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-baby-lead.jpg?w=500&h=399[/img]
[img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-2.jpg?w=500&h=375[/img]
[img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-4.jpg?w=500&h=613[/img]
[img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-7.jpg?w=499&h=749[/img]
[img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-15.jpg?w=500&h=731[/img]
[img]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-12.jpg?w=500&h=665[/img][/QUOTE]
.. young people become parents Waaaaaaaay too soon..
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Page stretching" - Gurant))[/highlight]
[QUOTE=Happy Goblin;21400980].. young people become parents Waaaaaaaay too soon..[/QUOTE]
you've been here 5 months and you still are be able to make yourself look like a complete dumbshit, not only by what you posted, but the long-ass shit you quoted and forgot to shorten
[QUOTE=Minorkos;21401260][IMG]http://manzano.nncdn.com/nn/0/885/439/o_563963.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
If we had guys for our penises I don't want to know what their personality would be like
[QUOTE=Aurora93;21401282]If we had guys for our penises I don't want to know what their personality would be like[/QUOTE]
They'd always have a stiff upper lip, I tell ya [i]that[/i] much.
Why must the sac be long and stringy?
[QUOTE][IMG]http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2010/01/man-babies-funny-15.jpg?w=500&h=731[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I swear that man's head looks like my old sports teacher.
[editline]07:36PM[/editline]
[QUOTE=Rougelead;21400115][IMG]http://lh5.ggpht.com/abramsv/R9jBGatLgDI/AAAAAAAALZ0/pmUKtVLn9-o/s800/000xshfa.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
[IMG]http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Sa-NAXwzFm8/Sfk_9Dl3hjI/AAAAAAAAAIQ/Zcvg610VhT4/s400/ScaryEasterBunny-smaller.gif[/IMG]
Why would anyone use eye holes like that?
[QUOTE=SlickBlade;21401371]I swear that man's head looks like my old sports teacher.[/QUOTE]
your old sports teacher was a baby?
[QUOTE=Wonky;21378948]^^^^Nice tits
[IMG]http://lbrandy.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/jpg_vs_png2.png[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Jpg is still superior for 90% of web applications.
Anything with lots of solid colours and hard edges that need to be preserved.
Photographs, game screenshots and drawings without hard edges or lrge blocks of solid colour still would be best saved in .jpg for the web.
stop bullshitting about that image
Guys, no one gives a fuck if .JPEG has some artefacts and .PNG is superior, for most images it's not even worth the effort of switching the file format to .PNG (example: all these LMAO pics, who gives a fuck if they have artefacts you aren't supposed to bask in the glory of it's clarity, it won't hinder you to laugh, will it?).
[QUOTE=Roll_Program;21402495]Jpg is still superior for 90% of web applications.
Anything with lots of solid colours and hard edges that need to be preserved.
Photographs, game screenshots and drawings without hard edges or lrge blocks of solid colour still would be best saved in .jpg for the web.[/QUOTE]
lol.
I have no idea where you got that idea from, JPEG utilises lossy compression, PNG utilises lossless compression, there really isn't actually any advantage of JPEG over PNG other than saving a couple of kilobytes and then it looks crap as well
It saves quite a bit of kilobytes.. enough to be worth the loss (which is barely noticeable on things like photos)
That was mean of them.
:crying:
[QUOTE=Hoboharry;21402780]That was mean of them.
:crying:[/QUOTE]
It's depressing comic week.
What do you expect?
[QUOTE=Aurora93;21394884][IMG]http://www.superpoop.com/041610/do-me-a-favor.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
wohoo leo 2 pwns
[QUOTE=MS-DOS4;21399421][img]http://img689.imageshack.us/img689/4361/1271483458092.jpg[/img][/QUOTE]
reminded me of this guy
[img]http://youtube.comedy.com/files/2010/01/ginger_kid.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=Kondor;21402755]lol.
I have no idea where you got that idea from, JPEG utilises lossy compression, PNG utilises lossless compression, there really isn't actually any advantage of JPEG over PNG other than saving a couple of kilobytes and then it looks crap as well[/QUOTE]
Filesize, you idiot.
The difference can be huge.
[editline]01:47PM[/editline]
Here's a random image to show you.
PNG - 621KB.
[IMG]http://imgur.com/WD5rX.png[/IMG]
JPG - 72KB
[IMG]http://imgur.com/yGZuv.jpg[/IMG]
Now scale that up to a 1920x1080 game screenshot, etc.
[editline]01:47PM[/editline]
The difference is so minor, the jpg is better for use on the [B][U]WEB[/U][/B]
[QUOTE=Chris122990;21400890]OH GOD THE JPG RAPE!!!
Anyway, in the interest of contributing something funny:
[IMG]http://i155.photobucket.com/albums/s297/Chris122990/1644.png[/MG]
^That is #3 on my list of reasons to read QC.[/QUOTE]
That was barely funny, and the last panel was completely unnecessary.
Why are we arguing about file formats in a thread for funny pictures?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
