Quote from The">http://phil.ipal.org/tc.html]The three images to the left demonstrate the difference between a spectrum of 32697 colors and the same spectrum reduced by quantization to only 256 colors. All three images are in GIF format. All three conform to the GIF89A format specification as published by Compuserve. The big difference is that the ANGIF library was used to generate the true color GIF directly from the data buffer in the program that created the spectrum of colors in the 217 x 217 pixel image.
The mistaken belief that GIF has a limit of 256 colors probably comes from the way GIF was first used when it came out. In the late 1980's, PC video cards generally supported no more than 256 colors. Image exchanges were becoming popular among BBS systems and the Internet and viewer programs were quickly produced. No one tried or needed to generate images with more than 256 colors since they could not be viewed on anything less than high priced graphics workstations. Programs that converted images to GIF worked up a number of methods to reduce the number of colors to 256 or fewer. Some actually did a very good job. GIF files were constructed with just a single image block, even though the GIF standard placed no limit on the number of blocks. Since there was no use for more than 256 colors, there was no use for more than one image block. This practice became effectively ingrained into the computer culture and eventually everyone "knew" that GIF supported no more than 256 colors. The fact is, the programs that generated GIF files supported no more than one image block, and thus didn't have a means to deal with more than 256 colors. The top image shows that a GIF file really can have more than 256 colors.
The more colors a picture has, the larger the GIF file will be. Multiple image blocks do have the overhead of another block header and another local color table, in addition to the poor compression. And in the case of ANGIF, there is no compression at all (no LZW implementation due to patent restrictions). So a GIF file with more than 256 colors gets very large very quickly. Unless there is a specific need for a lossless true color picture to be viewed on a browser not capable of PNG, true-color GIF should not be used.
While using more than 256 colors in GIF is in most cases a bad practice, and should be limited to certain technical cases where extreme size can be tolerated, a statement that the GIF image file format is limited to 256 colors is simply false.
The mistaken belief that GIF has a limit of 256 colors probably comes from the way GIF was first used when it came out. In the late 1980's, PC video cards generally supported no more than 256 colors. Image exchanges were becoming popular among BBS systems and the Internet and viewer programs were quickly produced. No one tried or needed to generate images with more than 256 colors since they could not be viewed on anything less than high priced graphics workstations. Programs that converted images to GIF worked up a number of methods to reduce the number of colors to 256 or fewer. Some actually did a very good job. GIF files were constructed with just a single image block, even though the GIF standard placed no limit on the number of blocks. Since there was no use for more than 256 colors, there was no use for more than one image block. This practice became effectively ingrained into the computer culture and eventually everyone "knew" that GIF supported no more than 256 colors. The fact is, the programs that generated GIF files supported no more than one image block, and thus didn't have a means to deal with more than 256 colors. The top image shows that a GIF file really can have more than 256 colors.
The more colors a picture has, the larger the GIF file will be. Multiple image blocks do have the overhead of another block header and another local color table, in addition to the poor compression. And in the case of ANGIF, there is no compression at all (no LZW implementation due to patent restrictions). So a GIF file with more than 256 colors gets very large very quickly. Unless there is a specific need for a lossless true color picture to be viewed on a browser not capable of PNG, true-color GIF should not be used.
While using more than 256 colors in GIF is in most cases a bad practice, and should be limited to certain technical cases where extreme size can be tolerated, a statement that the GIF image file format is limited to 256 colors is simply false.
The problem is that it seems like I could only find one program that can do it. I managed to get the source code but I can't compile it. It's written in c.
Could anyone try to look into and possibly fix it?
Attachments:
And it takes 10x as long to load.
None.
I think this is cooler:
It's a 2D projection of a 3D projection of a 4D Pentachoron performing a double rotation around two orthogonal planes. Mind boggling.
It's a 2D projection of a 3D projection of a 4D Pentachoron performing a double rotation around two orthogonal planes. Mind boggling.
None.
ᴄʜᴇᴇsᴇ ɪᴛ!
now that we have animated pngs, I fail to see the reason. Png is better than gif in every conceivable way except for extremely tiny images less than 16 pixels in size.
As I understand it, each gif layer has its own index. It would be pretty cool to layer the gif so that you get colors like interlaced files.
As I understand it, each gif layer has its own index. It would be pretty cool to layer the gif so that you get colors like interlaced files.
"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"
I order you to forgive yourself!
Quote from 
rockz
rockznow that we have animated pngs, I fail to see the reason. Png is better than gif in every conceivable way except for extremely tiny images less than 16 pixels in size.
Why would you use browsers other than Firefox?
None.
>be faceless void >mfw I have no face
Quote from 
Aristocrat
AristocratWhy would you use browsers other than Firefox?
Red classic.
"In short, their absurdities are so extreme that it is painful even to quote them."
"In short, their absurdities are so extreme that it is painful even to quote them."
ᴄʜᴇᴇsᴇ ɪᴛ!
firefox is the only one with diagonal gestures. Opera displays apngs as well.
"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"
Relatively ancient and inactive
Unless it works in Chrome AND IE9, it doesn't work.
None.
ᴄʜᴇᴇsᴇ ɪᴛ!
crap, SEN doesn't work!
"Parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Chairman - do we have to call the Gentleman a gentleman if he's not one?"
Relatively ancient and inactive
..? SEN works fine on Chrome and IE9.
None.
Options
Pages: 1
Back to forum
Please log in to reply to this topic or to report it.
Members in this topic: None.
[05:02 am]
Oh_Man -- because it adds anotherr level of player decision-making where u dont wanna walk too far away from the medic or u lose healing value[05:01 am]
Oh_Man -- initially I thought it was weird why is he still using the basic pre-EUD medic healing system, but it's actually genius[2024-5-06. : 3:04 am]
Ultraviolet -- VraelVrael shouted: I almost had a heart attack just thinking about calculating all the offsets it would take to do that kind of stuff
With the modern EUD editors, I don't think they're calculating nearly as many offsets as you might imagine. Still some fancy ass work that I'm sure took a ton of effort[2024-5-05. : 9:35 pm]
Vrael -- I almost had a heart attack just thinking about calculating all the offsets it would take to do that kind of stuff[2024-5-04. : 1:05 am]
Vrael -- I won't stand for people going around saying things like im not a total madman