Earlier quoted context omitted.
Adobe Photoshop has support for WebP (through "Save as", not "Export") but I don't think WebP is important.
But it can’t open them
Looks Photoshop has since v23.2 in 2022.
A new PNG spec
251–260 of 622 posts
Re: A new PNG spec
#252Earlier quoted context omitted.
Because the creator of gifs telling the world how he pronounced it made such a huge difference :) Not sure I'll bother to reprogram myself from “png”, “pung”, or “pee-enn-gee”.
When someone makes a baby, you call that person by their real name with the correct pronunciation, don’t you? So why can’t you do that with GIF or PNG? People that create things get to name them.
> People that create things get to name them.
And if they pick something dumb enough other people get to ignore them.
Re: A new PNG spec
#253A fun fact about PNG, the correct pronunciation is defined in the specification > PNG is pronounced “ping” See the end of Section 1 [0] 0: https://www.w3.org/TR/REC-png.pdf
Because the creator of gifs telling the world how he pronounced it made such a huge difference :) Not sure I'll bother to reprogram myself from “png”, “pung”, or “pee-enn-gee”.
I've said "jif" for almost 40 years, and I'm not stopping anytime soon.
Hard-g is wrong, and those who use it are showing they have zero respect for others when they don't have to.
It's the tech equivalent to the shopping cart problem. What do you do when there is no incentive one way or the other? Do you do the right thing, or do you disrespect others?
Re: A new PNG spec
#254[dead]
Re: A new PNG spec
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has fields to say what compression is used. Adding another compression form should be handled by existing software as recognizing it as a valid PNG that they can't decompress. The PNG format is specifically designed to allow software to read the parts they can understand and to leave the parts they cannot. Having an extensible format and electing never to extend it seems pointless.
Extensibility of PNG has been amply used, as intended, for proprietary chunks that hold application specific data (e.g. PICO-8 games) without bothering other software.
Doesn't pico-8 store the data in the least significant bits of colour? Maybe it got updated to use chunks.
Re: A new PNG spec
#256Earlier quoted context omitted.
But where the analogy with USB-C is very good is that just like USB-C, there is no way for a user to tell from the look of the port or the file extension what the capabilities are. Which even for a fairly tech savvy user like me is frustrating. I have a bunch of cables, some purchased years ago, how do I know what is fit for what? And now think of the younger generation that has grown up with smartphones and have bee…
> there is no way for a user to tell from the look of the port or the file extension what the capabilities are But that's typical for file extensions. Consider EXE – it is probably an executable, but an executable for what? Most commonly Windows – but which Windows version will this EXE run on? Maybe this EXE only works on Windows 11, and you are still running Windows 10. Or maybe you are running x86-64 Windows, but…
> Consider EXE – it is probably an executable, but an executable for what? Most commonly Windows
Has anyone ever used .exe for anything other than Windows?
Re: A new PNG spec
#257Re: A new PNG spec
#258Not backwards compatible. We just add it to that nice cupboard "great advanced image formats we will forget about". Society doesn't need a new image format. I'd wager to say not any new multimedia format. Big corporate entites do, and have churning them out at a steady pace. Look at poor webp - a format pushed by the largest industry players - and the abysmal everyday use it gets, and the hate it generates.
> Look at poor webp
What about it?
"Lossless WebP is typically 26% smaller than PNG, while lossy WebP can be 25-34% smaller than JPEG at equivalent quality levels"
This literally saves houndred of thousand of cost, bandwith, electricity every month on the internet. In fact, I strongly belive that this is one of the greatest contributions from Google to society just like ZSTD from Facebook.
Re: A new PNG spec
#259Re: A new PNG spec
#260Not backwards compatible. We just add it to that nice cupboard "great advanced image formats we will forget about". Society doesn't need a new image format. I'd wager to say not any new multimedia format. Big corporate entites do, and have churning them out at a steady pace. Look at poor webp - a format pushed by the largest industry players - and the abysmal everyday use it gets, and the hate it generates.
There are some applications for a new image format, but I agree that what we have is generally good enough.
We need good video formats however. Video makes up most of the global internet traffic, probably accounts for a good part of global storage capacity too. Even slightly better compression will have a massive impact.