Quote:
Originally Posted by alyCe
but then again, you can't say "this is the quality of a jpeg-image", just as you can't say that with png or gif. It all depends on how much you compress it. jpg is still suitable for many uses and for larger images, but the alpha transparecy is invaluable for webdesign. And statistics don't tell the whole truth, because although 32% of humanity sits on ie6 it doesn't mean that 32% of all your visitors will use it. People who care about design will probably not sit on ie6 for example
|
Alpha transparency is definitely invaluable for web design, I never said it wasn't. It's a great format and I'm delighted that IE7 supports PNG, and I can't wait until IE6 and older browsers are history.
For a portfolio site, sure IE6 users will probably not be your main target audience but for a lot of other sites it will be. A lot of work places and older folks are still on IE6. The commercial sites I do are for the event industry and our main target audience are on IE6.
I'd love to use PNG for shadows and stuff but our CMS doesn't support PNG yet and I couldn't be bothered with the fixes/hacks either.
I just don't get why you'd use PNG when you don't need transparency? The JPEG is set to 100% quality but is still smaller in file size than the PNG and I can't see the difference. Plus it will work on Aunt Karens old piece of crap running Ie6 with no hacks needed
Sorry for hijacking your thread Mitchbones
The Poor guy just wanted to slice his graphics