Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-29 Thread Cameron Simpson
On 27Mar2010 19:44, Stephen Hansen wrote: | Yeah, I don't expect much from PNG. The images are very small but I | might be sending a LOT of them over a pipe which is fairly tight, so | 50-60 bytes matters. That's why I selected GIF. How well does a stream of XPM files compress? Probably not enoug

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-29 Thread Gabriel Genellina
En Mon, 29 Mar 2010 04:41:23 -0300, Gregory Ewing escribió: Stephen Hansen wrote: So I wonder if there's just some hyper-optimization Photoshop does that PIL can't round-trip. You may find that PIL isn't bothering to compress at all, or only doing it in a very simpleminded way. Indeed. F

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-29 Thread Gregory Ewing
Stephen Hansen wrote: So I wonder if there's just some hyper-optimization Photoshop does that PIL can't round-trip. You may find that PIL isn't bothering to compress at all, or only doing it in a very simpleminded way. -- Greg -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-28 Thread garabik-news-2005-05
Harishankar wrote: > >> Just opening, and then saving the same file with no changes at all, >> resulted in a 72 byte file growing to 920. >> >> I thought it was GIF87a vs GIF89a... but have since come to determine it >> doesn't appear to be. I decided to give PNG a try again, since those >> extr

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-27 Thread Chris Colbert
since the images only use a couple colors each, just run length encode it. Depending on the image, you may be able to get a super small size that way, and avoid the whole mess. On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 11:32 PM, Harishankar wrote: > On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:44:54 -0700, Stephen Hansen wrote: > > > O

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-27 Thread Harishankar
On Sat, 27 Mar 2010 19:44:54 -0700, Stephen Hansen wrote: > On 2010-03-27 08:17:46 -0700, Alain Ketterlin said: > >> Stephen Hansen writes: > >>> If not, are there any decent other image libraries out there that >>> anyone's familiar with? The only one I could find was PythonMagick, >>> which s

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-27 Thread Stephen Hansen
On 2010-03-27 08:17:46 -0700, Alain Ketterlin said: Stephen Hansen writes: If not, are there any decent other image libraries out there that anyone's familiar with? The only one I could find was PythonMagick, which seems completely undocumented. Or I'm blind. I don't know PythonMagick, but

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-27 Thread Alain Ketterlin
Stephen Hansen writes: > Is it possible to get PIL to save GIF's in GIF89A format, instead of > GIF87A? GIF89 was patented. I guess that is why it isn't used by PIL. (The patent has expired now, IIRC.) Anyway, PNG was supposed to replace GIF. > If not, are there any decent other image libraries

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-26 Thread Stephen Hansen
On 2010-03-26 21:37:10 -0700, Lawrence D'Oliveiro said: In message <2010032618455468300-aptshan...@gmailinvalid>, Stephen Hansen wrote: Is it possible to get PIL to save GIF's in GIF89A format, instead of GIF87A? Why? What does GIF do for you that PNG doesn’t? If I take this PSD and save i

Re: GIF89A and PIL

2010-03-26 Thread Lawrence D'Oliveiro
In message <2010032618455468300-aptshan...@gmailinvalid>, Stephen Hansen wrote: > Is it possible to get PIL to save GIF's in GIF89A format, instead of > GIF87A? Why? What does GIF do for you that PNG doesn’t? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list