AOP Web Development
Hello dudes! i just like to have a survey for the web designers... for you which do you prefer in saving your image file is it PNG or JPEG?
Please vote the poll? and express your opinion..
PNG for graphics; JPEG for images.
Maybe for VERY small ones then... I think PNG graphics are quiet heavy for a web designs. Specially when you accentuating on the graphics+CSS global look, your page is likely to take a blody while to load (go on for several cofee cups then come back...)
But i fully agree with this ! Fact also is that PNG is a licence-free format (not GIF, for example, JPG i don't know...)
It should be PNG vs GIF...
PNG is better than GIF , but... because of IE ( ) we can't use it full power.
PNG is for graphic (like pictures, background, page elements) because it is a small file (verry!) when it use only few colors ... but IE have a problems with transparency
JPG is for logo, pictures etc because ot its good compression.
Found this on digg the other day.
Thought it would just end the entire thing and make me win.
Very simple too!
As far as i know . Both are different image formats that perform different functions and should not be compared .
Jpeg goes well with photographic images that possess or capture real natural light .
But PNG on the other hand , compresses block color and is good for images that possess color in a block .
THough , PNG has some great features in itself . like transparency and goes great with GIffy images .
i think PNG is the best. nice for the web
because of its transparency, the only disadvantage is,
full function is not implemented under internet explorer.
It's best than GIF - yes, but it's not the best, because there is no way to replace JPG by PNG ... for normaln pictures (lot of colors) PNG will be LARGE file
I use PNG for background, any borders, rounded corners etc
But this transparency+Microsoft ... sucks :/
i love png format with high quality lossless compression, but since other people still uisng IE version 6 alpha transparancy of png wont work so still gif and jpeg is still my choice
God, I could go on and on with the advantages of PNG format. For one thing, it gives transparency, as stated above, but it also gives you the option of antialiasing with text. Antialiasing can be a web designer's best friend, in my opinion. If you want a logo with text on it, for example, go with PNG and use antialiasing. It blends the text so it doesn't look blocky. It's especially effective with smaller text so it's readable.
PNG for templates, layouts and transparant images. Jpeg for larger pictures/photograps or use in computer games (or nvidia DDS)
PNG is alot more better picture file...
and it's support transparency....
so better qulity and transparency...
i have to say PNG!
I'm afraid I have to be "that guy" and point out the hypocrisy involved with this statement. You say that PNG is the better format and it has better quality, but your sig image is in JPG format. Please don't ridicule me, but I just found that to be a little off.
beacuse i use IE...i cant use the PNG format...
and....PNG weigh alot more...
maybe it's the only bad thing about it...
if i was using FF on this site..(and i think i will start use it...) i would make my sig as PNG....
But as always....our Microsoft friend dont like to work so hard and i still waiting them to supprt this format...
Just about the only reason I would use Jpeg is for Photos, because PNG is just all around better at handling compression, transparencies, and other things... PNG was made to have High Quality Pictures with low file sizes... thus the name, Portable Network Graphic
PNG is far superior and often achieves the same file size as lossy JPGs. Also Internet Explorer 7 is out and can finally handle transparencies so JPGs are obsolete and a thing of the past, really.
Thanks for that! Now my template won't suck.
I'm sorry but i've tested again this afternoon. I've saved a single button in both formats, and the PNG one was much heavier than the GIF one (670b. for the GIF VS 33Kb. for the PNG ) I just used 2 colors and a Shade effect, on a 24x24px button.
I don't really understand. Were am I wrong ?
The poll is strange, because PNG and JPG have different application. It's like comparing swimming to flying. Of course you can same a photo both in png-24 and jpg, but the choice depends on future use of such file. I like the capabilities that transparency in png-24 offers, it's a great tool for creating flash animation that look like painted with watercolors, which are then compressed by flash as jpg.
And thus available for every viewer. The choice between png and jpg is not our own decision but rather decided by the environment we want to present our works in, as far as now, we cannot use png-24 because stupid Internet Explorer fails to read it. I hate Internet Explorer, but many people and our client's target groups use that browser and so the projects need to be adapted to it.
I cannot wait until the moment comes when we'll be able to use all possibilities of png-24 on the web ! By the way have you experimented with svg ? This technology seems very promising.
i agree with you. and its true. my site is one example of this motto
Was the image presenting the store so blurry from beginning ? perhaps it would be a better idea to reduce it's size, or even use the png format with less colors but preserving better details?
If i am using png's with transparency it is difficult since IE6 does not support PNG transparency. So i used a jpeg with the background colored in there the transparency was for the background.
I used jpegs for the buttons ontop. But initially i used pngs till i found out they did not work in IE6
the only time i dont use png is when i am adding a picture that came from a camera, or an animation...ascide from that png is the way to go pretty much all the time
PNG has its benefits, mainly its quality, transparancy and lossless compression. However, I would perhaps not use it heavily as the backbone images on a website (such as the background or design), as it is a larger file size.
JPEG is fair quality, but it lacks transparency.
for images you must use jpeg, to increase the lossless! For graphics and transparancies you can use png our gif. gif files are smaller
PNG = ( Portable Network Graphics, a compressed image file format similar to JPEG )
png is the best, wallpapers photos, and its small size and gives the best picture view!
I think that PNG Images are better as they are more dynamic than JPEGs.
I prefer PNGs.
Due to the high level of adaptability, I recommend .PNG over .JPEG, preferable for most small to medium graphics.
I perfer PNG for quality and of course it can show transparency...
JPEG is good for keeping image size down whilst retaining decent image quality.
I pretty much use whatever format is the smallest for the given image. Usually, its GIF but sometimes PNG would come out the winner.
.PNG is great in the ability that it can contain meta information regarding image layers. Adobe Fireworks files are saved as .PNG files and save all layer information. The problem with .PNG files is that not everyone has caught on...if not ALL browsers work properly with this format and everything it has to offer, it will never work. I'm not sure, but is IE7 more .PNG friendly? I sure hope so because I honestly wouldn't mind leaving .JPG in the dust...because .PNG is .JPG + more. Not sure why Microsoft's having trouble getting up on the .PNG bandwagon.
I luv PNG and GIF.
JPEG is a compression file and I really hate losing quality in a file. But it is sometimes a solution for webdesign.
See this link: [img]http://tools.dynamicdrive.com/imageoptimizer/[/img]
You can compress the JPG files and get a 25% smaller file and almost no quality lose by compressing. You eventually can make the most files 60% smaller than your JPG was, so try it.
Optimize your webdesign.
You can upload .gif, .png, .jpeg, .jpg.
PNG definitely. My reasons are because PNG makes your image look neat while JPEG on the other hand is guarantied to make your image look very unclear and messy. I think that JPEG should just be used for pictures not graphics. PNG doesn't make your image lose color and things like that. So thats why I picked PNG.
JEPG is very good for websites.
But the PNG image is very good.
It is really hard to make a choice.
Jpeg's are a much better image, you can compress them to nearly any file size you want and they're crossbrowser compatible, png images display different;y in diffent browsers unless you use the websafe colors.
I think that png is real small in size, so i think it must be used for graphics as already said, and jpg for logo
I would say .. PNG is more better if you want to keep your pic look clear and colorful
JPG can also be good with optimization
Though PNG files might be larger than JPG , I would chose PNG!
I think is Jpeg is better than the PNG format..The quality factor,size enlargement and such factors make me to prefer the jpeg format..Then i also like gif format as images can be shown in a way as if it is a mini slide show...That's why i love gif format too....
thank you for this post. I don't really know much about png. I have always used jpeg for any image or graphical work, but I'm very glad to know that I can use png with some advantages.
GIF and JPEG are currently the primary file types for graphics on the Internet. This article provides an overview of each of them, as well as when each format should be used.
if you are interested to use Transparency than choose PNG.
I have a question regarding JPGs and digital cameras, if anyone can answer.
Most digital cameras output JPGs, or have done so--I'm not sure of the current situation, but my trusty old Canon Powershot does. It also has the raw image file option, which I don't use that often as it seems to need special software to edit.
My question: Is a full-quality, uncompressed JPG equivalent in image quality to a PNG of the same file size? Or, to phrase it differently, are JPGs inherently of lower quality than a PNG, all else being equal?
Say, a camera was able to produce both JPGs and PNGs. An identical shot was taken in each format. Would one be better quality than the other, with no editing involved?
I was wondering something else: are there cameras on the current market that produce PNGs? I believe some output in the TIFF format, which is pretty large in file size.