3 ms·

How can a lossy format replace a lossless format? The author clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.

by Grue3 11y ago

Someone1234 11y ago
Because the internet doesn't need a HUGE lossless animated image format. What it needs is something GIF-like (animated images with no sound) that works universally, is smaller, and doesn't consume too much battery on mobile devices. So BPG (or others) could replace GIF for the way GIF is commonly used today, rather than a direct 1:1 drop in replacement in all scenarios. If you really need lossless then continue to use GIF, support isn't going away soon, but for small soundless animations, a better alternative may be welcomed. PS - The statement "The author clearly doesn't know what they're talking about." is inflammatory and needless. The author never said anything either way about lossless/lossy.
mikeash 11y ago
GIF is extremely lossy for this use case since they can't do 24-bit color. In addition to being unnecessarily gigantic, animated GIFs also look terrible for just about anything that isn't pixel art. GIF itself is a lossless format, but when you use it for stuff like this the whole process is super lossy.
- Grue3 11y ago
  Perhaps GIF wasn't intended for this use case? Oh right, it wasn't. There are plenty of video formats that are. That doesn't make them "GIF replacement".
  - Gankro 11y ago
    Whether GIF was intended for this usecase or not (it wasn't, the GIF spec specifically calls it out as a bad idea [0]), it's overwhelmingly what it's used for in practice. Therefore anything that can displace GIF in this space is a replacement. [0] https://www.w3.org/Graphics/GIF/spec-gif89a.txt https://www.w3.org/Graphics/GIF/spec-gif89a.txt > Animation - The Graphics Interchange Format is not intended as a platform for animation, even though it can be done in a limited way.
    - ygra 11y ago
      Now I wonder whether there are more animated GIFs out there or 1×1 tracking pixels ...
  - mikeash 11y ago
    GIF has already been replaced by better formats. The one exception to this is short, looping videos, where GIF still enjoys enormous popularity. So yeah, GIF wasn't intended for this use case. But that's the use case it has right now. Go back 20 years, and "GIF" means a 256-color losslessly compressed image, occasionally animated. Today, "GIF" nearly always means a short looping video with horrible compression. Practically speaking, today, "GIF replacement" means doing a better job for short, looping videos, because that's all GIF has left at this point.
    - Grue3 11y ago
      >GIF has already been replaced by better formats. As long as Chrome/Webkit doesn't support APNG, there's no ubiquitous format that directly replaces GIF. >Today, "GIF" nearly always means a short looping video with horrible compression. To me, GIF means an image format. The fact that many people misuse the terminology doesn't mean we should propagate it. Instead, people should be educated on the difference between lossy video formats and image formats that support animation, and which is preferable for various sorts of media. Articles like the OP only confuse the issue further. As someone who has authored animation-editing software (Animstack script for GIMP), it's a major pain in the ass to explain these misconceptions to users. The least we can do is to use correct terminology, and educate people at every opportunity.
      - mikeash 11y ago
        > As long as Chrome/Webkit doesn't support APNG, there's no ubiquitous format that directly replaces GIF. That's a fun trick, to quote one sentence and disagree with it in a way that is already covered by the following sentence stating there is an exception. Do you find this helps further the conversation?
        Grue3 11y ago
        I only quoted the sentence I was replying to. To assume I didn't read the rest of your message is, frankly, insulting. The exception you were talking about ("short looping video with horrible compression") is precisely the thing that both GIF and APNG aren't supposed to do well. Both GIF and APNG support: - palettes - transparency - different delay per frame - combine/replace disposal mode per frame Generic video formats don't generally support these.
  - Dylan16807 11y ago
    I can't believe you're downvoted so hard for reminding people of the thing gif is good at. We already have 'short video clip' formats that are better than gif.
IshKebab 11y ago
BPG has a lossless mode.
- Dylan16807 11y ago
  Does its lossless mode compress non-photo images as well as png?
  - jonsneyers 11y ago
    No.
    - IshKebab 11y ago
      [citation needed]

How can a lossy format replace a lossless format? The author clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.

by Grue3 11y ago

How can a lossy format replace a lossless format? The author clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.

Because the internet doesn't need a HUGE lossless animated image format. What it needs is something GIF-like (animated images with no sound) that works universally, is smaller, and doesn't consume too much battery on mobile devices. So BPG (or others) could replace GIF for the way GIF is commonly used today, rather than a direct 1:1 drop in replacement in all scenarios. If you really need lossless then continue to use GIF, support isn't going away soon, but for small soundless animations, a better alternative may be welcomed. PS - The statement "The author clearly doesn't know what they're talking about." is inflammatory and needless. The author never said anything either way about lossless/lossy.

mikeash 11y ago

GIF is extremely lossy for this use case since they can't do 24-bit color. In addition to being unnecessarily gigantic, animated GIFs also look terrible for just about anything that isn't pixel art. GIF itself is a lossless format, but when you use it for stuff like this the whole process is super lossy.

Grue3 11y ago
Perhaps GIF wasn't intended for this use case? Oh right, it wasn't. There are plenty of video formats that are. That doesn't make them "GIF replacement".
- Gankro 11y ago
  Whether GIF was intended for this usecase or not (it wasn't, the GIF spec specifically calls it out as a bad idea [0]), it's overwhelmingly what it's used for in practice. Therefore anything that can displace GIF in this space is a replacement. [0] https://www.w3.org/Graphics/GIF/spec-gif89a.txt https://www.w3.org/Graphics/GIF/spec-gif89a.txt > Animation - The Graphics Interchange Format is not intended as a platform for animation, even though it can be done in a limited way.
  - ygra 11y ago
    Now I wonder whether there are more animated GIFs out there or 1×1 tracking pixels ...
- mikeash 11y ago
  GIF has already been replaced by better formats. The one exception to this is short, looping videos, where GIF still enjoys enormous popularity. So yeah, GIF wasn't intended for this use case. But that's the use case it has right now. Go back 20 years, and "GIF" means a 256-color losslessly compressed image, occasionally animated. Today, "GIF" nearly always means a short looping video with horrible compression. Practically speaking, today, "GIF replacement" means doing a better job for short, looping videos, because that's all GIF has left at this point.
  - Grue3 11y ago
    >GIF has already been replaced by better formats. As long as Chrome/Webkit doesn't support APNG, there's no ubiquitous format that directly replaces GIF. >Today, "GIF" nearly always means a short looping video with horrible compression. To me, GIF means an image format. The fact that many people misuse the terminology doesn't mean we should propagate it. Instead, people should be educated on the difference between lossy video formats and image formats that support animation, and which is preferable for various sorts of media. Articles like the OP only confuse the issue further. As someone who has authored animation-editing software (Animstack script for GIMP), it's a major pain in the ass to explain these misconceptions to users. The least we can do is to use correct terminology, and educate people at every opportunity.
    - mikeash 11y ago
      > As long as Chrome/Webkit doesn't support APNG, there's no ubiquitous format that directly replaces GIF. That's a fun trick, to quote one sentence and disagree with it in a way that is already covered by the following sentence stating there is an exception. Do you find this helps further the conversation?
      - Grue3 11y ago
        I only quoted the sentence I was replying to. To assume I didn't read the rest of your message is, frankly, insulting. The exception you were talking about ("short looping video with horrible compression") is precisely the thing that both GIF and APNG aren't supposed to do well. Both GIF and APNG support: - palettes - transparency - different delay per frame - combine/replace disposal mode per frame Generic video formats don't generally support these.
- Dylan16807 11y ago
  I can't believe you're downvoted so hard for reminding people of the thing gif is good at. We already have 'short video clip' formats that are better than gif.

IshKebab 11y ago

BPG has a lossless mode.

Dylan16807 11y ago
Does its lossless mode compress non-photo images as well as png?
- jonsneyers 11y ago
  No.
  - IshKebab 11y ago
    [citation needed]