Comment on Portable Network Graphics (PNG) New Specification
fwygon@beehaw.org 2 days agoAlpha channels are critical. The ability to have images have transparency in them is much more useful than you believe it is. Many end users have a need for it, more than they know they do; so this argument really isn’t doing much for your stance supporting PNG. Similarly PNG has supported alpha channels for quite a while.
Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 days ago
For production, yes. What percentage of images produced are for production, though? I know damn well how important alpha channels are, but for posting something on social media, which is orders of magnitude more output than image creation within the context of a larger presentation, no one cares.
The vast majority of people aren’t graphic artists. That you and I know what alpha channels are has no bearing on daily use by the masses.
skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl 2 days ago
Alpha channels are also why a lot of Android apps are full of PNGs. Every app you use will be using a PNG somewhere, probably uncrushed, full of Photoshop metadata.
Of course social media is full of lossy images. Websites can be, too. But plenty of web content is lossless PNGs in ARGB format, because that’s what the person making that shit decided to use, and they don’t care about saving a few milliseconds of transfer time every time you download their content.
Powderhorn@beehaw.org 2 days ago
If you know why you need alpha channels, of course you’re going to save in an appropriate format. But most casual users aren’t going to care. They took a picture of their breakfast or dog and just want to upload now. I’m not arguing PNGs serve no purpose; I’m arguing that most people aren’t Web or app designers. They don’t care whether it’s lossy or lossless, let alone about transparency.
B0rax@feddit.org 1 day ago
You are talking about photos. PNG is not the right format for photos.