Quote: Anthony Lemontwerp @ April 12 2010, 4:44 PM BSTFunny you should say that, I was just discussing how sucky it is that PNG images are so hefty.
Why not use a nice, small jpg then?
Quote: Anthony Lemontwerp @ April 12 2010, 4:44 PM BSTFunny you should say that, I was just discussing how sucky it is that PNG images are so hefty.
Why not use a nice, small jpg then?
Quote: Aaron @ April 12 2010, 5:17 PM BSTWhy not use a nice, small jpg then?
I would have to change the entire layout for the main page as I can't get the transparency effect with a Jpeg. Sucky I know.
Sorry for the late response, it's been all work and no play.
Quote: Anthony Lemontwerp @ April 14 2010, 11:52 AM BSTit's been all work and no play.
Hang about, you're a student! It's ALL play and NO work.
Quote: chipolata @ April 14 2010, 11:53 AM BSTHang about, you're a student! It's ALL play and NO work.
IF only. 2 years ago perhaps but I have aged about 20 years since the first year.
Quote: Anthony Lemontwerp @ April 14 2010, 11:52 AM BSTI would have to change the entire layout for the main page as I can't get the transparency effect with a Jpeg. Sucky I know.
Sorry for the late response, it's been all work and no play.
gif can handle transparency as well.
As for Onion style websites:
gifs handle transparency, but are really quite poor for colours.
Gifs are great for solid block colours, JPGs only for photos or images with a gradient in. Save for web in Photoshop can get the file size down pretty small.