APNG is dumb

[Werdnae]

What is ImageMagick and who uses it to resize animated GIFs anyway?

ImageMagick is the image software built into MediaWiki. Bulbapedia, Bulbanews and (most relevant to this case) the Bulbagargen Archives, all use Mediawiki software, and so all images are run though it. There's no real option to just not use it.

 

[Master Mew]

ImageMagick is the image software built into MediaWiki. Bulbapedia, Bulbanews and (most relevant to this case) the Bulbagargen Archives, all use Mediawiki software, and so all images are run though it. There's no real option to just not use it.

Is it possible to resize the images prior to uploading them then? So that resizing them through ImageMagick is not necessary?

 

[Noivern]

Is it possible to resize the images prior to uploading them then? So that resizing them through ImageMagick is not necessary?

I might want to see the results of ImageMagick GIF resizing first. I haven't seen it yet. (What's bad about it's resizing?)

 

[TM2-Megatron]

I must say, APNG_Fan is the most dedicated single-purpose registrant I've ever seen.

 

[Noivern]

Wait a second, the Nintendo DSi Browser, which is based on Opera, indeed supports APNG. So, if even that supports it, I think all Opera and Firefox browsers that are current should support APNG. However, we still have to consider other browsers. Even Chrome doesn't support it.

Even if we pulled up browser stats for Bulba*whatever*, it might not do much good anyway. Also, just because more Firefox/Opera users browse Bulba*whatever* doesn't mean we can forego GIFs. Support with some browsers VS support with almost all browsers - which one is better?

 

[APNG_Fan]

I must say, APNG_Fan is the most dedicated single-purpose registrant I've ever seen.

Haha :loopy:

Check out this demo, works in every browser:
http://animatedpng.com/index.php/apng-demo/

 

[Noivern]

Haha :loopy:

Check out this demo, works in every browser:
http://animatedpng.com/index.php/apng-demo/

That one serves GIFs when unsupported.

I think if we could make it so that it serves both GIF and APNG depending on the browser, then it's a win-win situation. Does the software that runs Bulba*whatever* support it? I hate to see that some browsers not getting the full experience.

 

[TTEchidna]

There's no experience. 90% of the time they're missing the second frame of an animated menusprite. Whoooooo hoo. As for the battle sprites... that's what owning the games are for.

 

[Noivern]

There's no experience. 90% of the time they're missing the second frame of an animated menusprite. Whoooooo hoo. As for the battle sprites... that's what owning the games are for.

But we have the APNGs up in there anyway, despite it. Why not make the animations visible to ALL users?

 

[SnorlaxMonster]

http://animatedpng.com/index.php/apng-demo/

If we can get that to work, then I see no reason not to. evkl said that Bandwidth isn't an issue, so the only reason I see to not implement it is if it is not technically possible, and laziness (most likely the latter).

 

[Noivern]

If we can get that to work, then I see no reason not to. evkl said that Bandwidth isn't an issue, so the only reason I see to not implement it is if it is not technically possible, and laziness (most likely the latter).

Precisely. Now we need to check whether it is possible to implement it in Bulba*whatever*'s software. However, for sprites, I think it's safe to assume that GIFs will work without any quality loss... Shall we start the APNG-to-GIF conversion of sprites?

 

[APNG_Fan]

"APNG -> sequence of PNG" conversion is possible with the apngdis tool (google it).

And ImageMagick should be able to take PNG sequence and convert it to GIF.

 

[Noivern]

"APNG -> sequence of PNG" conversion is possible with the apngdis tool (google it).

And ImageMagick should be able to take PNG sequence and convert it to GIF.

I would prefer something that directly converts APNG into GIF. In batches. It's a lot of work with the mouse and CMD.EXE to convert them like that.

 

[Master Mew]

I would prefer something that directly converts APNG into GIF. In batches. It's a lot of work with the mouse and CMD.EXE to convert them like that.

^ Agreed.

I wouldn't want that job...

 

[TM2-Megatron]

We've got a few grunts chained to desks in an underground bunker somewhere for that kinda thing, I'm pretty sure. :lol:

 

[Master Mew]

For the record, I actually do like APNG - but it isn't supported by Photoshop (my version of it, at least), so I don't use it.

 

[Jioruji Derako]

There's no experience. 90% of the time they're missing the second frame of an animated menusprite. Whoooooo hoo. As for the battle sprites... that's what owning the games are for.

By that logic, we don't need to show the typing or stats of Pokémon because "that's what owning the games are for".

We don't need to show sprites at all, no. We don't even need images for anything. But they enhance the experience, being able to come here and see every sprite for every Pokémon, looking at official artwork, and so on. That's part of what makes us the best Pokémon wiki on the web. I don't see any reason why we should hold back on anything at all simply because it's not needed; every extra bit of information and experience we provide just makes us that much more comprehensive and high-quality. And following in that line of thought, jumping from Firefox/Opera users viewing animated sprites up to all users viewing animated sprites serves to increase the quality of the information we provide.

Certainly, there can be arguments made for content that is not only unnecessary, but would also serve to decrease the experience; cluttering a page with too much information lowers the quality of the information. But I don't think that will ever be the case with this situation, or we wouldn't have animated sprites in the first place.

 

[Master Mew]

By that logic, we don't need to show the typing or stats of Pokémon because "that's what owning the games are for".

We don't need to show sprites at all, no. We don't even need images for anything. But they enhance the experience, being able to come here and see every sprite for every Pokémon, looking at official artwork, and so on. That's part of what makes us the best Pokémon wiki on the web. I don't see any reason why we should hold back on anything at all simply because it's not needed; every extra bit of information and experience we provide just makes us that much more comprehensive and high-quality. And following in that line of thought, jumping from Firefox/Opera users viewing animated sprites up to all users viewing animated sprites serves to increase the quality of the information we provide.

Certainly, there can be arguments made for content that is not only unnecessary, but would also serve to decrease the experience; cluttering a page with too much information lowers the quality of the information. But I don't think that will ever be the case with this situation, or we wouldn't have animated sprites in the first place.

I agree 100%.

Also, I only JUST noticed that the second Mew in my signature is an APNG... I thought they were both animated GIFs! ;-) (So if the Mew on the right isn't moving, your browser doesn't support APNG)

 

[TTEchidna]

For browsers that don't support apng: less stress on the computer from a million images moving. And there's your advantage. Tah dah.

If we go back and gif-up all this crap, or change it into the totally-unsupported mng, then any progress will have been lost. If you wanna force something to become standard, you gotta use it. We use it. Thus it will become standard. Soon enough.

 

[Jioruji Derako]

For browsers that don't support apng: less stress on the computer from a million images moving. And there's your advantage. Tah dah.

If we go back and gif-up all this crap, or change it into the totally-unsupported mng, then any progress will have been lost. If you wanna force something to become standard, you gotta use it. We use it. Thus it will become standard. Soon enough.

No offense, but that's a really weak argument. Let's remove all the images from the site, because that also reduces load times and computer stress. It's making things better!

And the thought that if we use it long enough, it'll become standard, is wishful thinking at best. We can keep using it until it becomes standard, but if that ever happens, I can assure you our role in the process will be irrelevant. The best we'd get is the right to say we used it before it was mainstream, and that would get old five minutes before it became standard.

I'm all in favor of supporting less-than-popular systems and items. My laptop computer is running on Ubuntu Linux, I use the .mkv video filetype, a majority of my programs are open-source (Blender, OpenOffice, Firefox)... I could go on and on.
But personal preference plays very little role in a professional website. Our job - hell, my job, as appearance coordinator - is to ensure that we deliver a high-quality experience, and that means using the most effective tools we can. If you cannot accept that .gif is a logically better option at the current time and in the foreseeable future, at least listen to the community and let's have some sort of consensus on this.