"Alan Wolfe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Just curious, is there a reason that PNG is a bad choice for this?
> Lossless compression seems like it'd be a great advantage and it isn't a fly
> by night file format.
Does PNG support 16 bit per channel? If not then TIFF is probably the
better choice for those.
And if there is the possibility that the pictures need to be modified
they should not be saved in a lossy format to begin with. Lossy
formats introduce artifacts that are normally not visible. But
certain image enhancing operations can "enhance" those, too.
Gimp-user mailing list