Jump to content

Talk:Multiple-image Network Graphics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Potatoswatter (talk | contribs) at 11:00, 12 March 2014 (→What happened?: new section). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I moved the article to MNG over redirect because it seems to be the standard the other articles on notable graphic formats (GIF, JPEG, PNG). - Sikon 15:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IE7

I have heard that Internet Explorer 7 will (and betas already do) support MNG. Is this true? If so, the article needs to updated to reflect this.

This is not true. Futurix 14:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Using SVG to animate

Could someone please give an example of animating PNGs using SVG? Thanks.4.225.21.216 19:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC) They are completey different, gif animations can be saved as png, svg can have animations, and javascript. 86.150.224.65 (talk) 17:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loss

The question remains: Is it lossless?

The frames are either PNG (lossless) or JNG (lossy) images. Wipe 08:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--//Mac Lover TalkC 02:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tools?

I have yet to find out which tools will actually create such a file?
Is it still true that FF will not display MNG files?
--Mjjohansen 18:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need an actual example image

Looking at the APNG article, there is a bouncing ball in apng format inline right at the top of the page. This makes it obvious whether the browser you are using supports the format. Surely this pages deserves no less than a working example in the top corner? Preferably the same actual image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.109 (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have created from the original animated SVG a bouncing ball MNG counterpart with imagemagick with transparent background and white background (These examples are compressed with bzip2). With a PNG (or maybe any other raster graphic that is supported by Imagemagick) file series, one can create a MNG file: 

convert -delay 15 -loop 0 -transparent white -dispose previous fubar*.png fubar.mng

Uploading these files to wiki commons seems to be not possible, because of the not supported file format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boroli (talk • contribs) 10:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Animation not much used?

The web was pretty much full of animated GIFs in those days. The specification justifies the exclusion on the basis of consistency of support; one would know a PNG file was an image and a PNG viewer would view it rather than not knowing whether it was animated and whether a viewer might not support that. This same principle of consistency of support is borne out through the mechanism used for extensions in the spec. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.160.33 (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MNG?

I can't even find sample images for it on the web, also I can't find official news since 4 years ago, this format is death, hope png drops it and choose APNG instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.200.209.2 (talk) 17:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sony Ericsson phone references in the article

Would anyone care to take them out besides me? Sony Ericsson has been taken over and dissolved by its parent company Sony, becoming Sony Mobile. Ericsson now exists seperately

Besides http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Xperia_S is the first Sony (no Ericsson) phone to be released in March 2012 and Sony has stated that they are only going to be working on smartphones and leaving those poor bricks behind :P

Also, having difficulty proving that those generic "recent Sony Ericsson phones" supported .mng format through online citations. Most searches reveal copies of this Wikipedia page as the only online source to claim this.

If nobody responds I'll be back to clean it up

R "David" Booth (talk) 06:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatives, as of Feb 2013

I've just edited the "Alternatives" section. Current text:

The most common alternatives are Animated GIF and Adobe Flash. Animated GIF images are restricted to 256 colors and are used in simple scenarios but are supported in all web browsers. Adobe Flash is a common alternative for creating complex and/or interactive animations and is natively supported by Internet Explorer 10 and Google Chrome.
In web pages, it is possible to create pseudo-animations by writing JavaScript code that loads still PNG or JPEG images of each frame and displays them one by one for a specified time interval. Apart from requiring the user to have JavaScript support and choose not to disable it, this method can be CPU and bandwidth intensive for pages with more than one image, large images, or high framerates, and does not allow the animation to be saved in one image file or posted on image-based sites such as flickr or imageboards.
Some web browsers support APNG, a non-standard extension to PNG for simple GIF-like animations. Another alternative is SVG images with embedded PNG or JPEG graphics, using SVG animation (if supported) or JavaScript to flip between images. <!--As of 2013-->Internet Explorer supports neither APNG nor SVG animation.<ref>Can I use Animated PNG? and Can I use SVG SMIL animation?, Alexis Deveria, CanIUse.com. Accessed 5 Feb 2013</ref>
Another approach uses CSS 3 features, notably CSS Animation, which now has some level of support in most major web browsers. CSS Sprites (providing several images as tiles in a single large image file) can be used as animations by varying which part of the large image is visible using CSS Animation or JavaScript.

My comments:

  1. In the third para, the ref tells you which browsers support APNG and/or SVG animations.
  2. APNG is not a viable alternative. (It is supported only in Firefox, which uses it internally, and Opera.)
  3. SVG with declarative animation might catch on if Microsoft enhance IE to support SVG animation.
  4. SVG with Javascript animation is technically viable, but websites will find it much easier to use DHTML (the second paragraph) instead.
  5. Browser vendors are planning to support CSS3 animations and CSS3 transitions, which allow some really cool effects with a few lines of CSS. Moreover, it is much easier for web developers to learn a few new CSS properties than SVG or Canvas 2D or whatever. So I predict that CSS3 animations will take off in a big way.
  6. See WP:CRYSTAL.

We could delete some of this section. We probably should delete the sentence about APNG. IIRC, I'm the editor who first mentioned SVG as an alternative, but I'd now be happy to see that sentence deleted. What do other editors think? Cheers, CWC 13:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated information.

There's no mention of Safari, or Chrome (which is REALLY surprising) and there's no reference to Photoshop's support for this format either, I'd test it on all three apps, but I can't find an example image on google (Google doesn't recognize filetype:mng) and this article doesn't even have any example images. Bumblebritches57 (talk) 22:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

The notability of the JPEG Network Graphics (JNG) stub is apparently mostly based on Wikipedia, if Googlebot doesn't lie—of course this premise is already wrong and therefore "proving" anything including its opposite. Merging JNG into MNG might help to rescue the JNG stub. –Be..anyone (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happened?

What's the stumbling block? Is MNG not as efficient as GIF in its niche? Is the reference library unsecure? The article seems to be full of patently false assertions that the format has been widely adopted, and short on analysis.

By the way, for those asking, you may find some images here. Stock Mac OS X and Firefox cannot view them. Potatoswatter (talk) 11:00, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Multiple-image_Network_Graphics&oldid=599270230"