View Single Post
Old 01-21-2008, 10:44 AM   #9
slayda
Retired & reading more!
slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.slayda ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
slayda's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,764
Karma: 1884247
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: North Alabama, USA
Device: Kindle 1, iPad Air 2, iPhone 6S+, Kobo Aura One
Quote:
Originally Posted by mbovenka View Post
As JPEG is (most of the time anyway) more compact than GIF, for a given picture file size the resolution can be higher.

Regards,
Marco.
This is not exactly true. JPEGs are generally smaller than GIFs from the same original. GIF's are 8 bit and use a lossless compression. JPEGs can be 24 bit but, except at the highest quality which is not usually used, is a lossy compression. This can be seen if you start with a 24 bit, uncompressed TIFF and change it to JPEG and back to uncompressed TIFF and iterate on this several times. Each conversion to JPEG loses a little and it accumulates.

On the other hand, if the original is 24 bit then the first compression to GIF loses 16 bits of color resolution.

Bottom line - if you start with an 8 bit image then GIF is better and if you are iterating in the compression of a JPEG, it is bad. But for a single compression of a 24 bit original, JPEG can be better quality and usually results in a smaller output file.

Maybe more than you wanted to know about GIFs & JPEGs.
slayda is offline   Reply With Quote