png or jpg?

[Shannon]

I have a question. What is better? .png or .jpg? .png has a bigger file size than a .jpg and I don't see any difference. Can anyone tell me what is the best way to go.

 

[StevieMo]

I'd say .jpg. It's a much more commonly used filetype.

 

[Shannon]

Ok. Thanks.

 

[Pako]

For professional printing and press, TIF or PNG would be the desired format. For web based purposes, JPG or GIF would be the more desirable format. JPG compression is rather good, however, that smaller print sizes will see little benifits of larger PNG or TIF formats, but they are uncompressed and in theory, attain a higher quality.

 

[Shannon]

Cool. Thanks Pako. 👍

 

[Giancarlo]

I say .PNG because it handles tough colors like bright blues much better than .jpegs or.jpgs do.

 

[Shannon]

Does png support animation? I heard it does but I'd just like to verify that.

 

[Giancarlo]

No, i'm pretty sure only .GIF's support animations.

 

[Pako]

Actually, it's the browser that support's animations. Likewise, you could have a program such as Fireworks that deals with PNG's and make an animation with it that is viewable as a animation within Fireworks, but browsers by nature can only interpret image sequences of gif's. So the answer is yes and no.

 

[Shannon]

I see. So, for web I'm am better sticking with the good ol' jpgs and gifs but for print tif and png are the way to go.

 

[Pako]

That's a good summary of a pretty general thought limiting yourself to just four image formats, but yes, that statement is correct and will get you far in life.

Eddy!

 

[Giancarlo]

It's too bad many browsers still don't support .PNGs.

 

[Pako]

Yes it is, but being a uncompressed file format, it would take extreem amounts of bandwidth if it became a standard.

 

[Shannon]

Originally posted by Pako
That's a good summary of a pretty general thought limiting yourself to just four image formats, but yes, that statement is correct and will get you far in life.

Eddy!

Okay, this thread may die now.