Brett, i'm not sure if the previous recommendation of PNG was for the
8-bit pngs with transparency, but that's what I'd argue. I often check
between GIF and 8-bit PNG when i export, to see which looks the best
at the smallest size, and PNG often wins.
On Nov 25, 2008, at 8:15 AM, Brett Patterson wrote:
No, I may have to disagree. GIF files are (a majority of them, if
not all, are) smaller. They have to be. Considering GIF only
supports up to a maximum of 256 colors. (it is 8-bit). Try
http://www.sitepoint.com/article/gif-jpg-png-whats-difference/
-------or-------
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Interchange_Format
You should never have to use a pngGauntlet-type compressor.
On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 7:10 AM, Foskett, Mike <[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
While I cannot help with the spacing issue I do strongly suggest using
png rather than gif.
File size is smaller especially when run through pngGauntlet.
Mike Foskett
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf Of tee
Sent: 25 November 2008 10:48
To: wsg@webstandardsgroup.org
Subject: Re: [WSG] your best practise for CSS sprites for elements
that
have no height declared
On Nov 24, 2008, at 3:24 AM, Robert O'Rourke wrote:
>
> If I remember rightly if you are able to save the image with a
> transparent background it keeps the file size lower because a
> transparent pixel takes less space than a pixel with colour
> information. You can put a coloured outline around the sprites
> themselves to avoid jagged edges in IE.
*******************************************************************
List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm
Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm
Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
*******************************************************************
