Hi Scott, on Sat, 10 Aug 2013 13:17:14 -0700 Scott Rossi wrote:
> in my experience, all of the options you cite > will usually work only if the colors of your source image > can comfortably fit within a range of 256 colors. > Images that are primarily solid colors or have > very complex patterns where dithering isn't > apparent are good candidates for reducing to 8 bit. > Photographic images with wide ranges of color > will often display visual artifacts when their color is > reduced to 8 bits, so the end result is not better > than the original. Many Thanks, Scott, for answering this request. Did you test optimizing this image: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/common/b/bc/Gluecksklee_(transparent_background).png in each one of these websites? http://www.8bitalpha.com/ http://tinypng.org/ http://compresspng.com/ In my tests, 8bitalpha.com always produces a smaller image and reduces the visible white artifacts around the transparent png. Al _______________________________________________ use-livecode mailing list use-livecode@lists.runrev.com Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
