By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
darconi on 02 March 2008
Edit Thread
Username2324 said:
JoeJ said:
Username2324 said:


P.S. GIF's look horrible

GIF's are a non-lossy format, so, well, you're wrong. :p It's a format that's best used for images with lots of repeated parts since those compress well with the LZW compression scheme. PNG is a similar format, but can do 24 bit color, as opposed to GIF's 8 bit color. Perhaps that's what you're thinking of?

If you had said JPEG, well, then we could have agreed with you since JPEG is a lossy format (like MP3) and achieves compression by throwing away data and approximating the output.

EDIT: Whoops, darconi beat me to it...


Well with my experience in Photoshop, the GIF files can only do 256 colors, total crap, while with JPEG you can set the quality by choosing what kind of file size you are looking for, and when set to max, there's hardly any difference between that and the original 24bit bmp file.

But I guess thats just Photoshop.


 Yeah, that's the primary problem with GIFs.  They're great for basic images but for more complex ones with advanced colors, you want to switch to PNG or something else.  You'll be surprised at how many images you see on the web that don't use more than 256 colors.

Actually JPEGs are horrible like JoeJ said, there's so much loss and when you increase the quality to max via Photoshop like you said, the file size gets absolutely huge and you lose all the advantages of compressing it in the first place.  So doing max quality on jpeg's is actually kinda...pointless since you might as well just keep it non-jpeg compressed.