[thelist] Watermark backgrounds and AOL

[Mark Howells]

I've made a quick test on the image at hand and while I agree on the general
principle that images containing large areas of flat colour work best in GIF
format, the one at hand may work better as a JPG.

http://www.mark.ac/help/logo.gif  (3947 bytes)

http://www.mark.ac/help/logo.jpg (3898 bytes, saved with PS6.01 at 73%
quality, the best to get the file size the same as the GIF version)

Though the points about AOL's image compression are probably the answer
here, it may be worth looking at these two to see which is better.

Regards
Mark Howells
Working in a Winter Wonderland
http://www.mark.ac

> Von: "aardvark" <roselli at earthlink.net>
> Betreff: Re: [thelist] Watermark backgrounds and AOL
> 
>> You might get better results if you use a jpg for that kind of image.
>> The file size may increase a little, but the aliasing will improve.
>> Just remember not to go too mad on compression the image when you save
>> it.
> 
> not that that's related to the issue at hand, but i did want to state
> that given the nature of the image (flat color, light color,
> background) that you're almost *definitely* better off using .gif for
> the file... you can get those watermarks down to 4 colors quite
> often, and if you have no dithering, it can be much smaller than a
> .jpg of comparable quality... and if it's a .jpg of comparable size,
> you'll find it introduces artifacts and noise -- most noticeable in
> large areas of flat color and on hard edges...