551–560 of 622 posts
>After 20 years of stagnation, PNG is back with renewed vigor! After 20 years of success, we can't resist the temptation to mess with what works.
> [not] Officially supports Exif data How can you call this basic fail a success?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Without the new HDR and color profile handling, PNG was still useful but significantly obsolete. Display hardware has progressed over a few decades, raising the bar for image files.
> Display hardware has progressed The continued popularity of non-HDR 1080p screens on laptops is a bleak reminder that most people would rather save a couple hundred bucks than buy HDR capable hardware. HDR is great for TVs and a nice-to-have on phones (who mostly get it for free because OLEDs are the norm these days), but display technology only advances as much as its availability in low-cost devices.
But you can absolutely have an SDR image encoded using a large color space. So I am not sure why the author talks about color primaries when it tries to justify HDR… I still don’t know what kind of HDR images this new PNG variant can encode.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Macromedia did this when saving Fireworks files into PNG. I forgot about this.. Fireworks was my favorite image editor, I don't know that I've ever found one I love as much as I loved Fireworks. I'm not a graphics guy, but Fireworks was just fantastic.
BTW. I am the author of https://www.photopea.com , which is the only software that can open Fireworks files today :D If you have any files, try to open theim (it runs instantly in your browser). https://community.adobe.com/t5/fireworks-discussions/open-fi...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have the same experience - but with gif . Mind you, me and my circle are not native English speakers. The debate itself is old. "Since the 90s" Wikipedia says, and keep in mind the format was is from 1987 - so I would say the debate is on from the get-go. Appropriate, too, if you think back, arguing about this kind of stuff was pretty common. Emacs vs vim, browser wars, different kinds of computers, tribalism every…
I think “since the 90s” here is “since the late 90s”. When I first was aware of gif files (in the early 90s IIRC) I only saw the name and meaning in print so went with the hard G to match the g's pronunciation in graphics, I don't think I was aware of the original intention to pronounce it jif until somewhere in the early 2000s, at which point the use of the hard g was almost ubiquitous and the soft g idea was presen…
Thinking about it, I think I understand why hard G makes sense for people. With GPU, we pronounce the the individual letters, as it's clearly an abbreviation - as no sane English word starts with "gp". With GIF though, even though it's an abbreviation, it looks a lot like a normal word, "gift", and English also has "give", another one with a hard G, so it feels familiar to say. Moreover, the US, where GIF comes from, has Jif already established as a peanut butter brand, so it makes sense to not pronounce a newly invented, differently written word the same as an already established thing. Well, at least to some it makes sense!
Author here. Hello everyone! Feel free to ask me anything. I'll go ahead and dispel some doubts I already see here: - It isn't really a "new format". It's an update to the existing format. - It is very backwards compatible. -- Old programs will load new PNGs to the best of their capability. A user will still know "that is a picture of a red apple". There also seems to be some confusion about how PNGs work internally.…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. https://developers.google.c…
Society wholeheartedly thanks Google for saving costs for Google
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My file manager can’t handle them but my browser can. Edit: and good luck uploading the format to the majority of webforms that aren’t faang.
Demand more from you file manager then.
Better image formats serve entities who store images at scale, not end users.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which aspects are not backwards compatible? You'll never be able to faithfully represent an HDR image on a non-HDR system, but you'll still see an image.
The problem is when "HDR" images that would perfectly fit into the sRGB color space are not rendered correctly on non-HDR systems. This PNGv2 fails that which means it isn't really any more useful and one of the existing (and much better) HDR-supporting formats like JPEG-XL or the video codec based ones pushed by the big guys.