I would use Gif because it is 256 color and you can use websafe w/ it. Png is good, but not for corners and borders if you are mixing it w/ html or css borders, the colors just do not match cross platform.
gif - max 256 colors, no loss, good for drawing-like images, animation, transparency
jpeg - full color, lossy compression, good for photo-like images, no animation, no transparency
png - full color, lossless compression, good all around, MUCH larger files from photo-like images than jpeg due to lossless compression, no animation, alpha channel transparency
well can png do websafe? I have not had great success w/ that. I open psp, set the site colors to a websafe (from the chart in my sig, it has a list) and set the color in php and walah they did not match
There is a spec for PNG animation called MNG but I've never seen any significant software support for either the creation or the viewing of it. It took a LONG time for the major browsers to support PNG and of course now the reason for PNG's creation (the Unisys LZW patent) no longer exists. (This is a particular interest to me because I was one of the original developers that worked with CIS to get GIF off the ground.)
PNG is full color so it can do web-safe but the apps generating PNG output have to support it to make it happen.
What is up with you people and your sick obsession with being web safe and standards aprooved?!? So now it's immoral to use jpg photos because they can't be viewed by anyone who hasn't moved out of the stone age, or doesn't have anything more than a 5 dollar video card? Well, hell, why don't you just outlaw the use of pictures of any kind all together, because that's just mean for people on text based browsers!
For god's sake, use what you WANT, not what standards have approved, just be conscious of the accessiblity, and if it's acceptable to you, who care what anyone else thinks? Anyone who uses gifs exclusively for accessibility reasons, I fully expect to never use flash, animated gifs (you gotta think of those still using 14.4 modems y'know), javascripting, tables, or over 5k of coding of any kind.
Originally posted by metallibanger hell, why don't you just outlaw the use of pictures of any kind all together, because that's just mean for people on text based browsers!
That's why you try not to convey important information through images, and place images as backgrounds whenever possible, and make sure you always use the alt attribute.
Last edited by Paul Jr; 12-24-2003 at 12:57 AM.
Thousand different paths
So many sterile ends
I chose the Devil's path
Never shall the sun kiss my face
And caress me with it's burning light
For I dwell in the shadows
And sleep side by side with death
Originally posted by metallibanger What is up with you people and your sick obsession with being web safe and standards aprooved?!? So now it's immoral to use jpg photos because they can't be viewed by anyone who hasn't moved out of the stone age, or doesn't have anything more than a 5 dollar video card? Well, hell, why don't you just outlaw the use of pictures of any kind all together, because that's just mean for people on text based browsers!
For god's sake, use what you WANT, not what standards have approved, just be conscious of the accessiblity, and if it's acceptable to you, who care what anyone else thinks? Anyone who uses gifs exclusively for accessibility reasons, I fully expect to never use flash, animated gifs (you gotta think of those still using 14.4 modems y'know), javascripting, tables, or over 5k of coding of any kind.
Andy Oliphant
A&M Design Studios
I use websafe because if it is not websafe all browsers are going to display it wrong, when you use images for border and code borders and the colors do not match it just looks like crap. Websafe = matches the colors in you html. I do not use jpeg because they generally just look like crap with those nasty little artifacts, I can get rid of those with psp but still... yea... never mind. I JUST DONT USE EM!
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks