(the following is a recounting of a discussion between me and Anthony5429, to be found on Anthony's talk page.)
I noticed that you created a template for suggesting that images be replaced with a PNG equivalent, an excellent idea as far as I'm concerned.
However, you have used it to suggest that photographic (or photolike, e.g. images that contain gradients with smooth transitions) images be replaced with PNG equivalents. Such replacement would result in drastically increased filesize with negligible or no gain in quality at all. Compare:
[1] [2] (note that the PNG version is slated for deletion, so it may or may not be around when you get to checking it out.)
The PNG version of this photographic image is four times larger, yet has no improvements in quality (with the exception of being cropped)! This holds true for any image converted from a lossy format (such as JPEG) to a lossless one (as PNG is), and while photographs both created and displayed in lossless formats such as PNG would undoubtedly be devoid of compression artifacts, they would also be way, way too large.
I ask that you please stop tagging photographic images with the ShouldBePNG tag, and use it exclusively for images which contain primarily pixel and line-art, as well as text. -- FrostyBytes 22:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
(end of recounting)
I created {{ ShouldBeJPEG}} based on this template as I found a recently uploaded GIF that should have been JPEG. However, the resultant template needs a new image. I am a lousy artist and didn't attempt to create the image. Please feel free to add it yourself. Will ( Talk - contribs) 06:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
This discussion is continued from User talk:Remember the dot#ShouldBePNG vs. BadJPEG and User talk:Bkell#ShouldBePNG vs. BadJPEG. The controversy is essentially over which images should be tagged with {{ ShouldBePNG}} versus {{ BadJPEG}}.
I think it would be nice to have a separate category for images that could be mindlessly converted by the PNG crusade bot, but if others disagree, then it's not a big problem. — Remember the dot ( talk) 02:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Why should the template "ShouldBePNG" not be used for animated images? -- 88.77.239.7 15:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Which consequences has the use of the template "ShouldBePNG" for animated images? -- 88.76.227.213 10:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Can someone more clarify explain which reason (with exception of alpha transparency and more colors) it gives to replace a GIF with PNG? Thanks. -- ( talk) 19:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
And here's another one that hasn't been mentioned before. PNG has no improvement for black-and-white images. Yes, the file size can be somewhat smaller, but all thumbnails will be nearly four times as large due to the wiki's scaling software. The thumbnails will not be any better, as both PNG and GIF only have 256 shades of gray (including black and white). A black and white image should be either GIF (if small enough) or JPEG (if not). — trlkly 14:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
The template claims that there is a loss of quality, and that a new image would have to be produced. However, this is very often not the case. The most common use of the template is for GIFs that have backgrounds which need to be transparent.
I think the language likely discourages people from fixing the easiest to fix,and this contributes to our large backlog. — trlkly 21:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)
(the following is a recounting of a discussion between me and Anthony5429, to be found on Anthony's talk page.)
I noticed that you created a template for suggesting that images be replaced with a PNG equivalent, an excellent idea as far as I'm concerned.
However, you have used it to suggest that photographic (or photolike, e.g. images that contain gradients with smooth transitions) images be replaced with PNG equivalents. Such replacement would result in drastically increased filesize with negligible or no gain in quality at all. Compare:
[1] [2] (note that the PNG version is slated for deletion, so it may or may not be around when you get to checking it out.)
The PNG version of this photographic image is four times larger, yet has no improvements in quality (with the exception of being cropped)! This holds true for any image converted from a lossy format (such as JPEG) to a lossless one (as PNG is), and while photographs both created and displayed in lossless formats such as PNG would undoubtedly be devoid of compression artifacts, they would also be way, way too large.
I ask that you please stop tagging photographic images with the ShouldBePNG tag, and use it exclusively for images which contain primarily pixel and line-art, as well as text. -- FrostyBytes 22:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
(end of recounting)
I created {{ ShouldBeJPEG}} based on this template as I found a recently uploaded GIF that should have been JPEG. However, the resultant template needs a new image. I am a lousy artist and didn't attempt to create the image. Please feel free to add it yourself. Will ( Talk - contribs) 06:23, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
This discussion is continued from User talk:Remember the dot#ShouldBePNG vs. BadJPEG and User talk:Bkell#ShouldBePNG vs. BadJPEG. The controversy is essentially over which images should be tagged with {{ ShouldBePNG}} versus {{ BadJPEG}}.
I think it would be nice to have a separate category for images that could be mindlessly converted by the PNG crusade bot, but if others disagree, then it's not a big problem. — Remember the dot ( talk) 02:05, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
Why should the template "ShouldBePNG" not be used for animated images? -- 88.77.239.7 15:23, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
Which consequences has the use of the template "ShouldBePNG" for animated images? -- 88.76.227.213 10:45, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
Can someone more clarify explain which reason (with exception of alpha transparency and more colors) it gives to replace a GIF with PNG? Thanks. -- ( talk) 19:00, 21 September 2010 (UTC)
And here's another one that hasn't been mentioned before. PNG has no improvement for black-and-white images. Yes, the file size can be somewhat smaller, but all thumbnails will be nearly four times as large due to the wiki's scaling software. The thumbnails will not be any better, as both PNG and GIF only have 256 shades of gray (including black and white). A black and white image should be either GIF (if small enough) or JPEG (if not). — trlkly 14:56, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
The template claims that there is a loss of quality, and that a new image would have to be produced. However, this is very often not the case. The most common use of the template is for GIFs that have backgrounds which need to be transparent.
I think the language likely discourages people from fixing the easiest to fix,and this contributes to our large backlog. — trlkly 21:44, 3 November 2011 (UTC)