3 ms·
I stopped reading when the author started to do comparisons with PNG. PNG or alternatives should only be used when the errors created by lossy compression is to
by AtNightWeCode 5y ago
I stopped reading when the author started to do comparisons with PNG. PNG or alternatives should only be used when the errors created by lossy compression is too visible.
With that said. Improvements of audio and video compression over the last 25 years are very impressive and have changed how the world works in several areas.
- ricardobeat 5y agoPNG is a good baseline for image sizes before adding any kind of smart compression. Nothing wrong with that, and the comparison would not look much different against JPG (except it would probably look actually worse than the video).
- AtNightWeCode 5y agoThere is no reason to use PNG today except for cases were image size does not matter.
- ricardobeat 5y agoFor the web, you might use it when you want alpha channels. WebP is still not supported everywhere. Regardless, it’s useful as a comparison in the article to show just how good h264 is versus other compression techniques. They are not recommending PNG or anything. WebP would only produce a 20-50% smaller file, not 1000x smaller, so it doesn’t really matter which image format they compare to.