https://www.programmax.net/articles/png-is-back/

>We're talking 3.5 years before the first iPhone.

>>105713189 (OP)
>png article
>pic on page is jpg

HDR really ruins everything.

does this mean they'll stop pushing webp

Reminder that Internet Explorer famously refused to support PNG transparency in version 6.

>>105713290

That’s what I immediately wondered too. Webp is such ass we need PNG and GIF to thrive for generations to come.

>>105713290
>>105713306
WebP supports lossy compression which works better for photos and other grainy images.

>>105713189 (OP)
Uses 'only 4 bytes', well 8 bits for 4 channels is 4 bytes.. so that's doubling the size per pixel to go to 16 bit per channel. I wouldn't prefix a size doubling with 'only'.

>>105713290
Lossy webp has different use cases and nobody cared about lossless webp anyway.

>>105713290
WebP already seems to be on the downslope. I see it less now than I used to (still comes up but it's more infrequent).

>>105713189 (OP)
Cool. Can I get a comparison with this new PNG spec, AVIF and JPEG XL?

I bet 4chan won't accept the updated png spec in uploads forcing yet another conversion step to upload here.

>>105713189 (OP)
It took a long, long time to overcome the low end autists who were whining on MNG. They are still sulking on the Phoronix forum. They have a lot to answer for.
The Amiga days with IFF was a happier period when hacking around file formats was celebrated.

>>105713386
>qith this new PNG spec, AVIF and JPEG XL?
I know nothing about picture data types except that this always causes shitstorms on here

>>105713290
Webp lossless compression still outperforms oxipng so probably not. It's like how JPG recently got mozjpg yet we still see webp lossy being used everywhere.

how do you pronounce PNG?
I say Peng

>>105713495
The tl;dr is AVIF and JPEG XL specialize in different types of images and colorspaces. Most controversially AVIF is hardware accelerated while JXL is not. That second part causes JXL nerds to foam at the mouth.

>>105713189 (OP)
Now watch as 4chan drops PNG support because it can't fucking handle scraping through pngs made to the new standard to make sure they're not pizza.
Or maybe you'll just get some error when you uploaded a nu-png and you'll have to convert it to the old spec.

>>105713189 (OP)
Now wait another 20 years and 4chan will introduce support for the new format

What's the point of png's when exrs exist

>>105713710
Thanks, the image autists were always too hard for me to crack

>>105713290
the purpose of webp is to get everyone to use the nsa's backdoored libraries, so not until they burn that 0day

>>105713189 (OP)
APNG WIN!!!!!!!

>>105713290
Stop being discriminatory—people in India with lower bandwidth and slower PCs also deserve a well-rounded internet experience.

>>105713338

Webp doesn’t play nice with Windows or macOS. Most people have things to do and PNG/GIF are way more convenient to deal with.

>>105713267
>post in a thread about new png spec
>picrel is gif instead of apng

>>105713428
>They are still sulking on the Phoronix forum
Link/screenshot please, I want to see the butthurt now that APNG is considered official

>>105714063
I can open WebP files on Windows 11 with no problem.

>>105713267
It was very funny that the banner on the main PNG site was a JPG, so many people pointed it out that they put a link to the FAQ entry explaining why right under the banner
They recently replaced it with a much larger one that is actually a PNG now, but the FAQ link is still there
https://libpng.org/pub/png/

>>105713682
Pee Engine

>>105714124
>Link
Sure:
https://www.phoronix.com/forums/forum/phoronix/latest-phoronix-articles/1555914-png-spec-updated-for-hdr-images-animated-pngs
To wit:
>APNG isn't fine. There used to be MNG for animated PNGs.

I remember more moaning, that might have been deleted.

>>105713189 (OP)
but the new png will be compatible with old devices?
i guess no
its not like that new jpg compression encoder that was just plain better yet retrocompatible

>Animated PNGs were proposed by Mozilla quite some time ago. Support was added to Firefox, but other programs hesitated to adopt them.

>Today, animated PNGs are widely supported. It is time for the spec to reflect reality.

Huh? So it wasn't in the spec before? Also 99.9% of decoders will never be updated to support the new features.

>>105713189 (OP)
Does this mean we can take avif and webp behind the barn?

>>105713290
You're so retarded it's not even a point to laugh you are just frustrating to encounter where you clearly don't belong

can we please just adopt jxl and be done with this shit?

>>105715228
Webp maybe but not avif, see >>105713710

>>105715342
lolNO see post below you, I forgot to quote you as well

>>105713189 (OP)
>hdr means more colors

>>105713189 (OP)
>>105713290
this would be a nice outcome, fuck webp

>>105713189 (OP)
is it backward compatible?

>>105715343
Avif to me is literally the 'I have an iPhone' image format. HW acceleration doesn't matter, CPU decoding for static images is fast enough.

>>105713338
so does jpegxl

>>105713297
no reminder needed, i still maintain sites with css filter hack for ie6 png transparency

>>105715513
>"DURRRRR WHO LE CARES IF YOU CAN ENCODE A GORRILLION AVIF IMAGES PER SECOND AND USE $0.01 OF ELECTRICITY! TO DO IT!"
ok retard

>>105715849
ah yes a common thing I do every day

>>105713743
i regularly get errors trying to upload images because the 4mb limit is too low. this site is dogshit

>>105713189 (OP)
Did they vibe code this?

Why do we need that much green

where's the hdr porn after all these years

>>105716214
for matrix

AVIF won
AVIFchads where you at?

>>105713189 (OP)
I'm not calling it a 'ping'. It has, is, and always will be a "pee en gee".

>>105716214
Mammalian eyes are very sensitive to shades of green.
There's is/was a lot of evolutionary pressure to be able to distinguish between shades of green because plants are mostly green, and nature is mostly plants.

>>105716329
>evolutionary pressure
No such thing. Read the Bible you retarded tranny.

>>105716444
You DO realize that thing is kike worship right?

BAD FUCKING IDEA

You're changing the file format, devices everywhere recognize png as containing a certain pattern of bytes, if you change that format you break compatibility with EVERYTHING.

So in the future this means that your PNGs will just randomly not work 50% of the time.

That's why you use new file extensions, representing new file formats...

>Behind the scenes, hardware and tooling are being updated to support the new PNG spec
Redundant.

>>105713189 (OP)
It's pronounced pee-enn-gay by the way.

its pronounced "nig"
the "p" is silent

>>105716493
png is designed to be extensible and has built in future proofing to enable the format to be extended over time.

>>105713189 (OP)
webp mother fuckers on suicide watch

>>105717356
Would it really outperform oxiPNG? See >>105713620

I know webp doesn't have HDR but it kinda feels like a meme thing desu.

>>105713290
Can't get webp thumbnails with irfranview ... T_T

>>105717530
No you're supposed to use icaros. Which is dumb as fuck because wank blows 10 was released in 2015 and should have had thumbnail support for that day #1.

>>105713349
16 bits per channel would be 8bytes
The article says that the new png format supports hdr without increasing the pixel size, presumably by encoding and some information in the chunk header and that makes me deeply uncomfortable for a lossless format.

Explain why should I use png when webp exists

>>105716493
Have you never worked with extensible, backward compatible formats before?

>>105716493
They still haven't learned their lesson with mozjpeg.

>>105714108
Use case for a moving .png?

>>105717960
Yes, 8 bytes is 4 bytes more than 4.

>>105713267
new image formats take 15 years to be adopted by the standards body (google chrome)

>>105718084
From the article:
>Many of the programs you use already support the new PNG spec: Chrome, Safari, Firefox, iOS/macOS, Photoshop, DaVinci Resolve, Avid Media Composer...

>>105713349
https://www.w3.org/TR/png-3/#cICP-chunk

>>105718123
>YUV parameters for a format dealing with RGB data
lolwut...

>>105717973
That's what what all thought with mozjpeg. Spoiler: mozjpeg JPGs will get converted back to normal JPGs right here on 4chan.

Picrel SHOULD be about 130 KB but 4chan will turn it back into a normal JPG which is infuriating as fuck to say the least.

>>105713189 (OP)
were so back sisters

>>105713682
"Pene Je"
-Pennis He- in spanish

>>105714108
APNG is blocked here, I believe.

>>105717501
webp is an inferior format that google developed, and they control so much of the web that they're still trying to force it on people. they literally removed JPEG-XL support from chromium because JPEG-XL outperforms webp in every dimension, and they couldn't have a competitor to the format they developed. literally no one wants webp except google

>also testing whether this animated PNG uploads

>>105718416
????

Lossless Webp: 2,606,916 (about 30% smaller)
https://files.catbox.moe/wxka03.webp

>>105713338
Why does that matter if websites don't support it as much as other formats?

>>105715395
HDR is literally extra color bits

>>105718619
But they do. Nobody here really knows why ads are allowed to be webp but not user uploads thoughbeit.

Some claim it's because webp is an insecure image format but if that's true then 4chan is putting everyone at risk by letting advertisers use it.

>>105718661
Hmm, compelling.

How do I create an apng file

So /g/ what will be the new era standard formats.

>>105718913
Ultra HDR JPEG (eg regular jpeg with some extra data tacked on that old decoders can ignore)

>we need to update PNG, one of the most tried and tested formats
>Why?
>SPARKS, SMOKE, FLAMING SKYSCRAPERS FALLING INTO THE ABYSS, AIRPLANES EXPLODING TO THE SCREAMS OF DELIMBED PASSENGERS, HELLFIRE RAINING FROM THE SKY, NUCLEAR HOLOCAUST npc noises

>>105713306
>Webp is such ass
Why? Can you explain on a technical level that isn't political and "ree i like [other nerd shit] better"?

In my tests webp encodes clean, fast, small and is much better for graphical animations in a world where there is a massive dearth of available formats. More importantly, it's supported and works right now.

>>105719418
Same file extension for lossless, non-lossless, animated and non-animated is ass.

>>105719476
I guess if you're a mindless consumer that can't program.

>>105719545
Why not make .EIT(every image type) that self contains every possible image type and feature. And when it lacks proper support from third parties we just say they are bad programmers.
Imagine the feature matrix, truly unbeatable image format.

>>105713290
>webp : we make files better and smaller!
>storage : cheaper than ever
>home internet : faster than ever
thanks, I guess

>>105713277
poorfag

>>105719573
>disingenuous kvetching
You listed all the necessary features. That's it. That's all that's needed.
>nooo but i don't like when things change, i want to stay mired in the same old garbage forever, it's hard for me to adapt

We NEED a better animated gif format. This isn't up for debate. And a good animated image format absolutely SHOULD be able to handle both lossy and lossless compression methods. The choice should be up to the utilizer which method he wants to use. That webp also does what jpeg and png do further minimizes implementation details and points of error.
You sound like a helpless consumer that thinks websites magically own and mutate images just to inconvenience him.

If you want to be a luddite and forever run around in your circular rut using the same old tech the rest of your life, no one is holding a gun to your head. But crying crocodile tears because the rest of the world is moving on ain't it.

>>105719596
>dude let's just waste gigabytes of unnecessary storage and bandwidth because... we can hahaha!
I find this mentality repulsive in the same manner I find people who leave the refrigerator door open, or people who buy a new smartphone every year. It's just fucking wasteful, even if you can afford it. It say more about you, as a person, than what the bottom line on your bank statement does. Case in point, every phoneposter retard that uploads a shitty grainy 4032x3278 rotated photo from smartphone, it just broadcasts that he has no idea what he's doing with the technology in his hand.

>>105713189 (OP)
At least link a better source
https://w3c.github.io/png/Implementation_Report_3e/

>>105713189 (OP)
https://github.com/w3c/png

>>105719674
I'm all for new and better features but I don't think they should be put under a single file extension.
What's the argument for it? Its easier for user, he doesn't have to know about different file extensions and what they do. But it is a caricature of a dumb end user, in my opinion people like to have different file extensions for different things.

>>105719573
thats what .tiff is iirc , which is from the 80s, and you can see how much is used in the web
also derived formats used by scientists like geotiff or .fits, that expand and add extra data

>>105713189 (OP)
Is there even a point to HDR? Its just more green isn't it?

>>105719699
Chris Blume (website owner) is part of the PNG Working Group, and his post literally links the spec at the very top. Must be miserable being this pissed about every single little ething.

>>105714166
czech'd and lrn2link
https://libpng.org/pub/png/pngfaq.html#jpeg-logo

>>105718416
>literally no one wants webp except google
webp still isn't supported in google docs or spreadsheets. Not even google wants to support webp.

>>105713620
>discussing an inherently lossless format
>still compare with lossy WebP option
Everybody advocating for and using a fucking format based on VP8 keyframes needs to kill themselves.
>>105713710
Completely moot for multiple reasons. AVIF will not hardware decode at resolutions greater than 8192x4096 on any consumer devices. Nobody is buying a fucking hardware image encoder. Never. Period. Nobody's fucking bought one since a physical JPEG card was necessary with a 386. If AVIF wasn't so fucking awful to encode at any reasonable speed without severe quality sacrifices, you wouldn't be mentioning this "need". You can encode JPEG-XL on a fucking Nehalem potato.
Fucking retard.

did PNG really not suppor exif data before? holy shit

Support from Adobe. Wow. More proof that everyone despises webp

>>105719699
>>105721179
He is also the third person mentioned as a contributor here:
>>105719727

>>105721511
4chanXT fucked with my apng test.
4chan.org says:
APNG format not supported.
bah humbug

>>105721579
Gosh dammit.
"You've got it exactly right! For you, the "luser" (end-user), the direct, day-to-day impact of the PNG Third Edition is largely about increased reliability and confidence in the global acceptance and future-proofing of APNG and PNG in general."
magick -dispose background -delay 12 cb_*.png output_v3.apng

ffmpeg -hide_banner -i output_v3.apng -c:v libvpx-vp9 -crf 0 -b:v 0 -auto-alt-ref 0 -lag-in-frames 0 -row-mt 1 CB_apng2webm_v2.webm

>>105721453
It kinda did, but only in a bullshit roundabout way. You can add a PNG chunk with whatever you want in it. Not everything will be able to read it.

apng is the worst format for animated pictures

>>105722534
APNG would be perfect if it actually let you encode successive frames the way GIF does, like half-assing keyframes by allowing you to draw partial successive frames, or just assign a new frame as "replace". Every frame in an APNG is...a full PNG frame.
WEBP is fucking awful for animated images. If I reach a point where GIF isn't enough (256 colors) AND APNG is too bloated (# of frames exceeds one digit, really high res) I'm not going to use a neutered fuck ass version of VP8 LARP-ing as an image codec...I'm just going to use fucking x264 and save a video.

>>105723438
>allowing you to draw partial successive frames
But it can do this, both GIF and APNG let you use transparency to show parts of the previous frame

>>105723465
Wait really? Shit. Thanks.

>>105723438
>I'm not going to use a neutered fuck ass version of VP8 LARP-ing as an image codec
I'd rather just use honest lossless VP9 in WebM instead of the shitfuck that is WebP

>>105723438
>256 colors
you can use gifski if you want more colors, but it's still a gif and therefore it's shit for anything animated

>>105724305
>Bought animation
Man, life as a coomer is miserable

>>105719694
>take photo in landscape
>preview in your photo gallery is right-side-up landscape
>check EXIF and the dimensions are 16x9/16x10/whatever
>upload photo
>it's fucking upside-down
Divine punishment for phoneposters.

>>105714057
no they don't

>>105714057
Well then maybe these corporations should stop serving pages with megabytes of javascript and css frameworks.

>>105718661
The reason is because 4chan is a dead website, and hiromoot won't update anything if it won't bring him cash (which advertisers do). He just doesn't touch it because he couldn't care less.

>>105718619
>webp is bad because..... because i can't post it on 4chan
jesus christ this board is full of literal children

>>105713189 (OP)
Literally best fileformat ever.

>turn on hdr
>image looks washed out
every time

Are you guys stuck in the 90s? Png is fine

>>105713682
Ping

>>105718037
yes
https://img4.gelbooru.com//images/c8/23/c8230bdfa918a8e7101340940d7ce165.png

>>105713379
>WebP already seems to be on the downslope
was on the downslope when it was released.

>>105715395
> literally a drooling fucking retard

>>105728158
very nice

>>105713417
Why what could go wrong with format conversion on 4chan?

>>105713682
pinga

>>105713189 (OP)
>Officially supports Exif data
Welp.
What a colossal fucking retarded faggot.
PNG is officially big brother bloatware.
He might as well write a blockchain about all the male sex partners he's had.

>>105713277
It makes Breath of the Wild on Switch 2 better
Sunrises and sunsets are even more kino

>>105713376
>>105717501
I like lossless WebP because in many cases it’s half the size of an optimized PNG.
I don’t really like lossy anything
>>105714063
macOS handles WebP just fine
You’re full of shit
>>105715228
Unfortunately no
>>105715513
Hardware decoding means your phone battery lasts longer
This isn’t nothing
>>105717971
So people can upload your images to 4chan without recompressing them first
>>105721114
Bigger difference between the blackest blacks and the lightest lights on the same screen
Great for modeling the real world like sunrises/sunsets in Breathy Tears of the Wild Kingdom
>>105721453
I thought PNG predated EXIF data

>>105719674
>We NEED a better animated gif format. This isn't up for debate.
WEBM supports alpha channels. 4chan just strips them for some retarded reason.

>>105718137
I don’t see YUV mentioned at all

>>105713277
It's really only beneficial for capture. For playback, people really have been conditioned to think that they NEED their retinas burned with 1000nit light.

>>105732643
4chan limits webm's capabilities to retarded levels while allowing pdf uploads

>>105734575
They didn't ban PDFs after the hack?

>>105734575
> this out of touch
catch up with what's going on or shut the fuck up, retard.

>>105734635
yes

>>105734856
fuck off, it's temporary and they want to bring them back eat my ass fucktard

>>105728133 (checked)
>Are you guys stuck in the 90s?
I wish.

>>105734910
> doubles down on his retardation
shut the fuck up, retard.

>>105716493
mid level bait post
C for effort

>>105715395
yes

>>105716493
this has to be bait

>>105713710
why did you stop using your trip?

>>105735591
Tragically, this was the attitude among the PNG developers. Most seemed to be on the defective end of the spectrum.

>>105714775
>but the new png will be compatible with old devices?
from what I see they added HDR info using a new png chunk, so older decoders will simply ignore it. god knows how they will decode the info without it though, maybe the same as they do currently? I mean that would be optimal, stuff that doesn't support it will look the exact same as before, but the new things will not have the colors fucked.

>>105713189 (OP)
Are the apngs smaller than gifs? How would I go about making apngs?

>>105713189 (OP)
>png is back.
I still prefer gif.

>>105716296
I'm going to call it a ping in jee just to annoy you now.

>>105713620
You should losslessly compress your ass. Everyone fucking hates webp.

>>105713189 (OP)
If there's no reference implementation that's well tested and sanely written so people can fuzz their own implementations against it, then the new standard is fucking worthless.

>>105716493
>So in the future this means that your PNGs will just randomly not work 50% of the time.
that's just some insane fucking bullshit you've made up because you're so fucking retarded that you can't read and don't understand how png works. how the fuck did you fail this hard at life, fat cunt?

>>105739461
> random drivel from a fucking idiot
please stay out of the conversations had by white men that know how computers and file formats work. if we wanted random word salad gibberish we would go to /pol/.

>>105713277
TSMT
Nobody fucking asked for this

>>105716493

>>105713189 (OP)
>apng
>mozilla
I thought that was opera and that mozilla was slow to support them?

>>105737600
>from what I see they added HDR info using a new png chunk
yes
>so older decoders will simply ignore it.
yes
> god knows how they will decode the info without it though, maybe the same as they do currently?
old decoders won't decode it. they can display palette without the hdr data, retaining backward compatibility.

>>105716493
If a new standard is being implemented, it's always going to account for backwards compatibility for older standards. Dumbass.

>>105740238
i'd like to believe that was bait but there really are people that fucking stupid posting with a serious face.

>>105715395
this, is this even a real article? how could the spec writers of an image format mix up HDR and wider colour gamuts?

>>105740331
>how could the spec writers of an image format mix up HDR and wider colour gamuts?
post hands, ramajeet.

And nomacs still doesnt support APNG :(

>>105715395
>>105740331
to be fair it only says that such a color space is typical with HDR images, not that that's what HDR is. it's just a bit misleading, same deal with this image >>105740453
that said the spec also adds a way to set the color space, so this is relevant here, I guess HDR is just the big buzzword and everyone also associates it with a bigger color space even though that has nothing to do with it

>>105718274
Your attached image is 132kb. 4chan is displaying the wrong size.

Moot please allow apng

>>105742266
>Your attached image is 132kb. 4chan is displaying the wrong size.

4chan uses cloudflare image compression, the files you download here have been recompressed by cloudflare so they can save 1% on size. As a consequence, if an image is reposted often, it will keep losing quality with every iteration. And Image hash search is now useless as well.

You can get around this by adding a GET tag to the file. for ex. https://i.4cdn.org/g/1750997376061271.jpg will result in 132kb, but https://i.4cdn.org/g/1750997376061271.jpg?fuck=cloudflare will result in the original ~144kb file.

test

>>105713682
P Niggy.

>>105744448
The same as the original (734 KB).

168751 bytes

>>105744103
See >>105744707

>>105713189 (OP)
when i can see le png animated ?

>>105744448
>Becycle Bin

>>105713189 (OP)
death to webp

>>105713189 (OP)
To be, or not to be: that is the question. Isn't it, webp xhsisters?

>>105747067
Becycle Bin :DDD

If I have a PNG viewer from 10 years ago, will I be able to open up a PNG from 2025? If not, what is the point of calling it PNG?

>>105713189 (OP)
fuck you niggers give me the full CIEXYZ colourspace

>>105747241
Yes, it's just some chunks added to the specs, a proper PNG viewer would just ignore them if it doesn't support them, the image will still render (mostly) fine, just not with the new features

>>105719418
4:2:0 trash. literally unusable
100% quality lossy webp will have worse colors than a 50% jpg with 4:4:4

>>105749352
That's a pretty low IQ take. 4:2:0 JPGs probably constitute like 80% of all JPGs in existence and for a VERY good reason. 4:2:0 image use 50% less memory. Yup, turns put it's not "da joos!" this time. While video game screenshots make 4:2:0 stand out it's usually not a problem especially if it's viewed on a small display.

https://dev.to/petertech/reducing-jpeg-uiimage-ram-usage-by-50-2jed

whats the use case for more green?

>>105713290
god I hope so fuck webp

>>105713338
just use jpeg

>>105749670
No transparency support.

>>105744448
>Network Neighborfood

>>105713189 (OP)
>another tranny image spec
dead on the vine
see also troonpegxl

>>105749670
https://slow.pics/c/JwCYzJr8

>>105749706
What, you don't consider your neighbors to be food?

Why would I want this over webms or SVGs?

>>105721114
HDR images have a larger capacity for color vibrancy AND a larger capacity for higher luminosity. And in my opinion, the expanded luminosity is the biggest draw to HDR. It means that an image of the sun is going to be a little bit brighter than the background of a Microsoft word document.

>>105741731
All current HDR "display" formats use Rec.2020 as its encoding space, regardless of whether or not the image actually needs that much vibrancy, and regardless of whether or not the technology currently exists to actually display all of Rec.2020 space.
Working space, is a whole different beast entirely. You can have linear floating-point "scene" space be whatever color space you want, even greyscale, as long as you specify it and define its black and white points.

>>105736659
pixdaiz has this bizarre habit of making and abandoning trips after a few months. he is genuinely one of the most retarded people on this board and that is seriously saying something

>>105713290
>they
who?

>>105713428
>The Amiga days with IFF was a happier period when hacking around file formats was celebrated.
We need to return: hack around, have fun, try something new, have more fun and get good things. IFF was chunk based so it is possible to add all kinds of extensions and chunks.

>>105744103
>You can get around this by adding a GET tag to the file
Neato