More of my PNG-24 goodness

kojikun · Post by **kojikun** » 2003-10-26 11:46pm

Durandal wrote:Wow, how'd you end up doing it? I couldn't get the outline quite right in Photoshop, though I didn't try too hard. Thank you though.

LOL I created a new layer under it, selected the outline of the text, then used a medium grey to stroke center with a width of 1px.

Dillon · Post by **Dillon** » 2003-10-27 01:40am

This thread has got me wondering, what are the differences between transparent GIFs and transparent PNGs? Is it just a picture quality issue, because I believe transparent GIFs are supported by IE.

Post by **Dalton** » 2003-10-27 06:58am

observer_20000 wrote:This thread has got me wondering, what are the differences between transparent GIFs and transparent PNGs? Is it just a picture quality issue, because I believe transparent GIFs are supported by IE.

PNGs are a replacement format for GIFs, as I recall, because the company that owns the patent on the GIF file format has begun demanding royalties for its use.

Darth Fanboy · Post by **Darth Fanboy** » 2003-10-27 07:24am

Dalton wrote:
observer_20000 wrote:This thread has got me wondering, what are the differences between transparent GIFs and transparent PNGs? Is it just a picture quality issue, because I believe transparent GIFs are supported by IE.
PNGs are a replacement format for GIFs, as I recall, because the company that owns the patent on the GIF file format has begun demanding royalties for its use.

Isnt that Compuserve?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-10-27 12:51pm

Awhile ago Unisys demanded royalties for any program using the LZW compression algorithim that was not free. If it was free, you had to get a license, but that was free for them anyways.

PNG was an attempt to get around this with a wholly new algorithm. It is superior, but IE's alpha-channel support is incomplete which has strangled implementation. IE/Windows only supports 1-bit alpha; PNG24 supports 8-bit alpha, which IE either dithers down to 1-bit or ignores.

Unisys's patent on LZW has expired, however. As such, much of the world still uses GIF, which is sometimes more efficient than PNG. Functionally, there is virtually no difference between the two for 8-bit graphics.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-10-28 01:16am

observer_20000 wrote:This thread has got me wondering, what are the differences between transparent GIFs and transparent PNGs? Is it just a picture quality issue, because I believe transparent GIFs are supported by IE.

GIF only supports up to 256 colors. PNG supports the full 32-bit range. Also, PNG supports 8-bit alpha channels (the key to antialiased graphics), while GIF only supports 1 alpha bit. PNG is basically GIF's successor, though I still want a web-ready format with support for 32-bit alpha dammit!

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-10-28 10:30am

Durandal wrote:GIF only supports up to 256 colors. PNG supports the full 32-bit range. Also, PNG supports 8-bit alpha channels (the key to antialiased graphics), while GIF only supports 1 alpha bit. PNG is basically GIF's successor, though I still want a web-ready format with support for 32-bit alpha dammit!

Most people's computers don't even support 10bits/channel, nevermind 32-bit alpha

Iceberg · Post by **Iceberg** » 2003-10-28 10:39am

A math-major friend of mine says your equation is messed up.

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-10-28 11:13am

Iceberg wrote:A math-major friend of mine says your equation is messed up.

FWIW, my TI-89 disagrees with the right-hand-side of that equation. I'll mess around with Maple later if I get the chance.

Durandal · Post by **Durandal** » 2003-10-28 06:16pm

Iceberg wrote:A math-major friend of mine says your equation is messed up.

He could very well be right. I thought more about the Photoshop masking than the actual math.