Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #62103
| From | nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.mac.system |
| Subject | Re: Printscreen |
| Date | 2014-07-09 00:23 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <090720140023006602%nospam@nospam.invalid> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <andreas-C7AAD7.07512908072014@news.individual.de> <c22hrlF9jU8@mid.individual.net> <slrnlrp3gc.kr1.g.kreme@amelia.local> <c23lkrF7h9tU1@mid.individual.net> <090720141611333741%YourName@YourISP.com> |
In article <090720141611333741%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote: > > > PNG was annoying for some people because Firefox didn't support it for > > > some time. It is a *far* superior format to pict or tiff. > > > > Yep. I always considered PDF to be a very strange default choice. > > Mac OS X's default print format is Postscript / PDF, so it's also the > default choice for the screen capture because it basically prints the > screen. the graphics in mac os x is based on pdf, so making the screen shot use that format was trivial. pdf is not just printing and there is no postscript. > PNG is a horrible image format that takes longer to decompress nonsense. > and has > bigger files than JPEG. png is lossless and jpeg is lossy. lossless is going to be bigger than lossy. > TIFF without compression is much better, not necessarily, and they're much, much bigger than either png or jpeg. > especially for print use. no. you can't see a difference with a high quality jpeg versus tiff in print or on screen for that matter. > Websites that insist on using PNG format > images take much longer to download and display via a dial-up > connection. that's because they're bigger. however, png can do things jpegs can't, such as transparency. it would also be a *lot* worse if they were tif.
Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Printscreen gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-07-07 09:28 -0700
Re: Printscreen nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-07 13:35 -0400
Re: Printscreen Steve <gratefuldead@xs4all.nl> - 2014-07-07 19:55 +0200
Re: Printscreen Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-08 09:26 +1200
Re: Printscreen nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-07 18:04 -0400
Re: Printscreen gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-07-07 17:38 -0700
Re: Printscreen nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-07 20:58 -0400
Re: Printscreen Andreas Rutishauser <andreas@macandreas.ch> - 2014-07-08 07:51 +0200
Re: Printscreen Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-08 15:42 +0000
Re: Printscreen Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-09 00:34 +0000
Re: Printscreen Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-09 01:53 +0000
Re: Printscreen Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-09 16:11 +1200
Re: Printscreen nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-09 00:23 -0400
Re: Printscreen Jolly Roger <jollyroger@pobox.com> - 2014-07-09 05:21 +0000
Re: Printscreen Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2014-07-08 13:27 +1200
Re: Printscreen nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2014-07-07 21:46 -0400
Re: Printscreen Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2014-07-08 05:43 +0000
Re: Printscreen Patty Winter <patty1@wintertime.com> - 2014-07-07 20:22 +0000
Re: Printscreen gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2014-07-07 14:20 -0700
csiph-web