Which format for small website images? GIF or PNG? [closed]

Answer 1

For images on the web, each format has its pros and cons. For photograph-type images (ie lots and lots of colours, no hard edges) use a JPEG.

For icons and the like, you have a choice between PNG and GIF. GIFs are limited to 256 colours. PNGs can be formatted like GIFs (ie 256 colours, with 1-bit transparency that will work in IE6), but for small images they're slightly larger than GIFs. 24-bit PNGs support both a large gamut, and alpha transparency (although it's troublesome in IE6).

PNGS are your only really sensible choice for things like screenshots (ie, both lots of colours and hard edges), and personally, that's what I stick with most of the time, unless I have something for which JPEG is more suitable (like a photo).

Answer 2

gif files will tend to be a little smaller since they don't support a transparency alpha channel (and maybe for some other reasons). Personally, I don't feel the size difference is really worth worrying about nearly as much as it used to. Most people are using the web with some sort of broadband now, so I doubt they will notice a difference.

It's probably more important to use the type of images that your manipulation tools work best with.

Plus, I like the ability to put an image on any background and have a drop shadow work, which points me more towards the png format.

Answer 3

I usually use gif's because of the size, but there is also png-8 which is 256 colours as well.

If you need fancy semi-transparent stuff then use png-24.

I usually use the 'save for web' feature in photoshop, which lets you fiddle with filetype, number of colours etc and see the result before you save. Of course I would use the smallest possible which still looks good in my eyes.

Answer 4

Personally I use gif's quite a bit for my images, as they work everywhere, obviously your transparency limitation is one key element that would direct someone towards a specific format.

I don't see any downfalls to using gif's.

Answer 5

A major problem with GIFs are that it is a patent-encumbered format (EDIT: This is apparently no longer true). If you don't care about that, feel free to use GIFs. PNGs have a lot more flexibility over GIFs, particularly in the area of colorspace, but that flexibility often means you'll want to "optimize" the PNGs before publishing them. A web search should uncover tools for your platform for this.

Of course, if you want animation, GIF is the only way to go, since MNG was basically a non-starter for some reason.

Answer 6

If they get smaller and you have nothing to gain from using the features PNG offers (which is alpha channel transparency and more than 256 colors) then I see no reason why you should use PNG.