This chart offers some dubious suggestions, even ignoring the "Burn it with fire" bit. Unfortunately, it doesn't explain any of its reasoning.
A photograph that's not real big is probably still better suited for JPG. And there's no reason to use GIF for any still image - PNG will be superior in all situations. A moving image may be better off as an MP4 for modern browsers in terms of file size and quality, but there's no mention of that here.
mp4 with fallback to gif doesn't make much sense. More appropriate would be webm, or in the future AV1 with a fallback of h264 mp4 for video or high quality animated images. Using gif for small animations is fine, especially if you have transparency.
The "Yes" path for `Is it transparent?` leads to the node, `Does it move?`, for which "No" leads to `JPG or PNG`. But clearly the answer should be just `PNG`, right?
And in that case almost everything can be a webp - animations, transparency, lossy for compression or lossless if need be. You can still burn the bathroom selfies if you want. Except vector, you still want SVG for those.
SVG to me is always overlooked as a means to present not merely vector graphics but also other things like JPEGs with alpha transparency at a smaller size than equivalent, non-indexed PNGs for larger images (link a JPEG for the image and another JPEG/PNG/GIF for the mask, or both together as one image and use half for one and the other).
It's a rather flexible format, even if you're only embedding it within an img element/via CSS (ie: disabling its other possible functionality like video/JS/interactivity, though this comes at the downside of requiring base64'ing the embedded images, offsetting the some of the filesize savings...).
One can also utilize CSS animations within them (or alternatively SMIL in any Blink or Gecko based browser), whether embedded as an object or image.
I tried writing a breakdown of image formatting for the web (specifically ecommerce) that mostly focused on JPG vs PNG. It's still WIP but if anyone wants to check it out or has feedback please reach out. It's specifically not blogspam, more of a working document that I hope to be able to share with clients: https://aloagency.com/blog/preparing-images-for-web
Safari doesn't support WebP, unless they added it recently, in which case there are still a lot of non-(WebP-supporting) Safari browsers out in the wild.
As always we need to wait for Apple to get their shirt together.
beering|6 years ago
A photograph that's not real big is probably still better suited for JPG. And there's no reason to use GIF for any still image - PNG will be superior in all situations. A moving image may be better off as an MP4 for modern browsers in terms of file size and quality, but there's no mention of that here.
avhon1|6 years ago
For small icons with few colors, I find GIFs to be consistently smaller than PNGs.
For example, my website's favicon:
KaoruAoiShiho|6 years ago
Raphmedia|6 years ago
Is it a vector image? -> Use .svg
Is it an illustration (bitmap) with transparency (i.e. a cutout of a man) -> Use .png
Is it animated? -> Use .mp4 and fallback to .gif
Is it a photo? -> Use .jpg and compress as much as possible
ktpsns|6 years ago
Anon1096|6 years ago
the8472|6 years ago
danso|6 years ago
rhacker|6 years ago
But just in general all of it needs to be redone when Webp is more widely used.
https://developers.google.com/speed/webp/
And in that case almost everything can be a webp - animations, transparency, lossy for compression or lossless if need be. You can still burn the bathroom selfies if you want. Except vector, you still want SVG for those.
Anon1096|6 years ago
CamperBob2|6 years ago
simlevesque|6 years ago
[deleted]
dankohn1|6 years ago
fsh|6 years ago
3JPLW|6 years ago
parliament32|6 years ago
simlevesque|6 years ago
PNG are handled by Firefox since Firefox 1 or 2, over ten years ago.
bluetidepro|6 years ago
mceachen|6 years ago
cgrealy|6 years ago
This is clearly aimed at people who already know this. It's a joke.
Springtime|6 years ago
It's a rather flexible format, even if you're only embedding it within an img element/via CSS (ie: disabling its other possible functionality like video/JS/interactivity, though this comes at the downside of requiring base64'ing the embedded images, offsetting the some of the filesize savings...).
One can also utilize CSS animations within them (or alternatively SMIL in any Blink or Gecko based browser), whether embedded as an object or image.
m-p-3|6 years ago
Is it a logo? No
Result: GIF
I can't even
mcv|6 years ago
austinhutch|6 years ago
Mathnerd314|6 years ago
deanstag|6 years ago
simlevesque|6 years ago
vladojsem|6 years ago
I can imagine it a bit more useful and less cluttered by removing bathroom selfies. Yet I understand the viral element: Burn it with fire!
simlevesque|6 years ago
unknown|6 years ago
[deleted]
unknown|6 years ago
[deleted]
nailer|6 years ago
Yes: JPG
No: SVG
If you're uploading bitmap diagrams logos etc. they should be vector.
magicalhippo|6 years ago
egfx|6 years ago
onion2k|6 years ago
dheera|6 years ago
As always we need to wait for Apple to get their shirt together.
atiredturte|6 years ago
SimeVidas|6 years ago
Step 1: Suggest GIF as an option.
tzakrajs|6 years ago
Is it a photograph? No
Is it vector? Yes
For a Website? No
Does it have a gradient? No
Gif
Wat? Once you get to "Is it vector?" it should just point to SVG