Re: 216 colors web palete

[Guillermo S . Romero / Familia Romero]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (2000-07-24 at 1246.23 -0500):
> I got question about the Web palete. If I use any of those 216 colors,
> will my web page look the same on Explorer, Netscape, and same look on
> Macintoshes, PCs and other machines or it is not so standard as I think?

There have been a lot of docs about that, and the conclusion, IIRC,
was that you should use an optimized palete and forget all the rest:

- if user has 16 or 24 bit display, forcing palette is really bad, cos
you win nothing.

- if user has 8 bit display, you do not know if he is really using the
web palette or another, so the best is to let the user decide (most of
systems have an internal system to readapt when data varies).

To add insult to injury, you never know if the user has correctly set
his gamma or the environment is right (lights, reflections, etc) or
the DAC of the video chipset is working like the rest.

And BTW it is really rare to have the same look under different
browsers. After all the web is a place to share info, not a DTP
system.

GSR
 

Re: 216 colors web palete

[pixel fairy]

> Hi.
> 
> I got question about the Web palete. If I use any of those 216 colors,
> will my web page look the same on Explorer, Netscape, and same look on
> Macintoshes, PCs and other machines or it is not so standard as I think?

its just to avoid dithering, and your better off trying you image on
multiple platforms than going with guidlines like this, especially with X
where you dont know how many colors youll get. also, with many types of
images, it doesnt matter and/or the dithering is actually a good thing.

since even the $200 laptops on recycler can display at least 16bit color,
its not really as worth worrying about as it used to be (unless your
audience is using sun ultrasparc 5s, i seriously wonder what they were
smokeing when they made the decision to ship those things with 8bit
color)
 
> Thanks in advance.
> niko
>