PNG vs BMP

[Looki]

As a general rule: PNG is a much lower filesize, and should be used for pretty much everything. BMP has no compression, and is solid image data, so it's a better quality, but at a really huge filesize. For general use use PNG.

PNG is lossless. The quality is exactly the same.

[Shawn]

As a general rule: PNG is a much lower filesize, and should be used for pretty much everything. BMP has no compression, and is solid image data, so it's a better quality, but at a really huge filesize. For general use use PNG.

I have a question. Since PNG's have an alpha transparency layer, do they take slightly more size to store in an MMF2 app than an image using BMP or whatever format that does not have an alpha transparency?

[LB]

That will slightly increase the file size though.

Does the above not answer your question or did you just not bother to read it?

[Stephen]

No need to be rude, LB.

[LB]

Sorry, I didn't mean for that to come off as rude. I need to pre-read my messages more often... >_>

[Shawn]

That will slightly increase the file size though.

Does the above not answer your question or did you just not bother to read it?

Yes I read it. I was trying to clarify if he was speaking of the actual PNG itself or the MMF2 app. After re-reading though it does appear he was speaking of the active object in the app. That's what I get for reading too fast :P

[Mico]

I would add that I saved my images as BMP for years and ignored PNG. Now, I am a PNG junkie. If you create lots of images then saving as PNG will save you disc storage space if nothing else. (I do, though, save some solid graphics as GIF.) All my original images begin as layers within a Photoshop file. Images for ani frames and active pictures are exported using Photoshop's save for Web.

[Shawn]

I would add that I saved my images as BMP for years and ignored PNG. Now, I am a PNG junkie. If you create lots of images then saving as PNG will save you disc storage space if nothing else. (I do, though, save some solid graphics as GIF.) All my original images begin as layers within a Photoshop file. Images for ani frames and active pictures are exported using Photoshop's save for Web.

It can be annoying adjusting graphics in the picture editor with the way it handles the alpha layer. If you have to move something over a few pixels, you first have to move the solid layer, then go in and move the alpha layer. Unless I'm just doing something wrong I don't think there is a way to just move both layers in the picture editor at the same time.

[LB]

I'm more concerned with making my app or game smaller in file size by only using PNG's where necessary.

No. All images inside of MMF2 are stored in MMF2's own format. It does not matter what the original file type or format was.

I think you mean something else?

[Shawn]

I'm more concerned with making my app or game smaller in file size by only using PNG's where necessary.

No. All images inside of MMF2 are stored in MMF2's own format. It does not matter what the original file type or format was.

I think you mean something else?

Okay, now you're contradicting yourself :P

If you look above, I already asked if actives with transparency layers take more file size in an MMF2 app, and you responded that Looki already stated they did. Now you're saying that's not the case. So I'm confused. I don't know if you misread my question to Looki or what.

What I was originally wanting to know is if an active object with a transparency layer increases the file size versus actives without transparency layers. I was under the assumption that transparency layers contained additional data, thereby increasing the file size.