Is there a similar format to a GIF but with can hold many more

>>56916989
webp using the lossless compression mode.

>>56916989
webm

apng

apng, mng, lossless webp, flif

>>56916994
>>56916995
>>56917052
>>56917091
out of all of these which one offers the BEST quality disregarding file size? for example I have a series of pictures ready to be animated frame by frame and I only care about quality not compatability

>>56917358
everything mentioned is lossless or supports lossless, as GIF is lossless it only makes sense to compare it to other lossless formats

Fliff or apng.

>>56917415
>GIF is lossless
wtf

>>56917358
lossless vp9 webm/mkv for best compatibility

>>56917415
>gif is lossless
technically true, but it's practically irrelevant where the data is reduced. gif is effectively lossy since it can't store the source data. gif can't doesn't support many common framerates btw

>>56917469
>webm
webp should be getting wider adoption once firefox implements it.

As of right now it hasn't even made it into the nightly builds though so it could be a few more months, but first quarter 2017 we might start to see webp support on all the major browsers

>>56917469
>gif is effectively lossy since it can't store the source data
but that would make it lossy
gif stores what it's given exactly, that's what makes it lossless

if your source isn't supported by the gif format, then it needs to be converted to something that is, this is out of the scope of gif

for example, calling gif lossy because it can't store 24bit color images is nonsense
PNG can't store 128bpp images, does that make it lossy? no, it's just a limitation

>>56917572
>PNG can't store 128bpp images, does that make it lossy?
you need to reduce it to be supported so it'd be effectively lossy for the purpose of storing images of this kind, even though the format itself is not lossy

>>56917676
So because you are improperly using the codec you're going to call it lossy despite the fact it is in no way a lossy codec...


Retard

One that can be used right now: webm

One that exists but 4chan refuses to support: webp which is smaller than GIF and has more colors but is also bigger than a webm.

>>56917703
the process is lossy, not the format, dipshit.

if the process is lossy the format can be lossless all it wants, the format is ***effectively*** lossy for that purpose

How does Webm compare to APNG? I'm only going to be viewing the file on my computer not on the web

>>56917776
But that is because YOU the user are using it for a situation it isn't designed for.

I understand what the fuck you're saying, but if you use something that is properly supported by the codec it IS lossless, so it is a lossless codec, by definition.

Not using it properly makes it your problem.

File: Capture.png (208KB, 1919x1049px) Image search: [Google]

208KB, 1919x1049px

I'm using photoshop, I'm trying to save about 30 pictures into a PNG format so I can make a APNG, is there a way to do this as photoshop doesn't have PNG to save all the files at once

>>56917776
this kind of reasoning is how people keep getting things wrong

it just confuses people who don't know, and pisses off people who do

>>56917850
why use a gui for a cli job?

>>56917863
how would I do it then?

>>56917977

for i in *; do convert "$i" "${i%.*}.png"; done

basic, one at a time

parallel -j $(nproc) convert "{}" "{.}.png" ::: *

encode in parallel, potentially much faster if you have a multicore cpu

>>56918130
Ah I done it by making recording my action and using the script