Ban .bmps?

[Jacek]

Why are .bmp images allowed on this site? it only provokes noobs to upload their 'lovely' terrains as six 1MB each .bmp files. Can't we just stick to .jpg, .gif and .png, all three offering efficient compression?

oh and not sure about firefox and internet explorer, but in opera, to see a .bmp attachment, I need to DOWNLOAD the image first. That's stupid -_-

 

[Kimbo]

I agree with this, im forced to dl instead of tab the image or click on it and wait for the pain in the ass to take up my screen.

 

[HappyTauren]

In both IE and FF you have to download them first. And I am on 56k, so I don't bother downloading anyway.

 

[wd40bomber7]

I agree bmps take forever....

 

[Earth-Fury]

In the worst case scenario, where someone needs to post something as a BMP, they can just 7z it up. Speaking of which, it seems ".7zip" is allowed, but not ".7z"

 

[DesKaladA]

ya

and i do beleve we cant .tar or .bzip or .bx2 files

and we also cant upload .vrml (and .wrm)

 

[Dr Super Good]

I dont care, it should only take 3 secs to load on my conection.

However that is server bandwith, so I recomend that maybe some kind of auto compress script. It would be demanding but would be better than hading all that server load caused by people viewing the images.

Anyway, jpg at 1% compression or less is near lossless and still 1/4 or less of the size.

 

[Jacek]

why not ban .bmps completely? most sites do it

and PNG is LOSSLESS and offers very good compression.

if ban isn't possible, then as you suggest - make some script that converts bitmaps to PNGs/JPGs automatically

 

[Kaitech[SanD]]

JPGs lose detail BIG TIME, if you need to post a picture of a skin, then you need all the colour...

 

[Earth-Fury]

JPGs lose detail BIG TIME, if you need to post a picture of a skin, then you need all the colour...

JPEGs use a lossy compression. However, the ammount of detail lost depends on the ammount you compress it. A very lowly compressed JPEG is still very close to the origional, while being much smaller. Whereas you can also heavily compress a JPEG, making it look like complete crap, but be even smaller.

JPEG is by far the best format for posting screenshots and all such things. GIF and PNG are better then bitmaps, but not by the margin JPEG is. (Even at lower levels of compression.)

 

[Pyritie]

JPGs lose detail BIG TIME, if you need to post a picture of a skin, then you need all the colour...

MS Paint automatically makes jpegs have the bad quality compression, if that's what you're getting at.

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

.bmp's shouldn't be allowed, I fully agree with you Jacek. People can just make .png files.

 

[DesKaladA]

ya eather way mspaint supports pngs

so i see no problom removign bitmaps

 

[madcat2]

Yeah bmp seems pretty useless. It's not for us to decide though.

 

[Ralle]

BMP has been banned

 

[Samuraid]

As an additional note:

If JPEG at 100% is not good enough for you (your eyes are amazing if you can see the difference), then please use a 24-bit PNG. PNG is basically a bitmap of sorts that is compressed with zlib deflate compression. It will give you 100% quality, and a reduced size.

 

[Gilles]

What about TGA? It can't even be viewed on the site. I hate when people post them. Ban it so people have to post viewable pictures.

 

[Kaitech[SanD]]

TGA is like... half the size of BMP. But we can't view them... It's annoying!

 

[madcat2]

We need tga for requests when people want icons(That aren't in BLP)/preview screens.

 

[ragingspeedhorn]

TGA is used in Warcraft, BMP is not.

 

[Pyritie]

.Tga is obviously used for things like icons and wc3, like madcat and raging said. Also it has an alpha channel. And it's easier to open a .tga than a .blp at any rate.

 

[Gilles]

Ahh I didn't realize that you needed them for icons. Dang.

 

[Wolverabid]

Thanks for disposing of the bitmaps Chieftain (IMO) they're useless.

.tga files however, as stated, do have use in Warcraft III modding.

~ Issue resolved; thread closed.