Talk:Multiple-image Network Graphics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(Untitled comment)[edit]

I moved the article to MNG over redirect because it seems to be the standard the other articles on notable graphic formats (GIF, JPEG, PNG). - Sikon 15:57, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

IE7[edit]

I have heard that Internet Explorer 7 will (and betas already do) support MNG. Is this true? If so, the article needs to updated to reflect this.

This is not true. Futurix 14:00, 13 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Using SVG to animate[edit]

Could someone please give an example of animating PNGs using SVG? Thanks.4.225.21.216 19:20, 29 July 2006 (UTC) They are completey different, gif animations can be saved as png, svg can have animations, and javascript. 86.150.224.65 (talk) 17:05, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Loss[edit]

The question remains: Is it lossless?

The frames are either PNG (lossless) or JNG (lossy) images. Wipe 08:22, 5 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks.--//Mac Lover TalkC 02:29, 18 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Tools?[edit]

I have yet to find out which tools will actually create such a file?
Is it still true that FF will not display MNG files?
--Mjjohansen 18:41, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

We need an actual example image[edit]

Looking at the APNG article, there is a bouncing ball in apng format inline right at the top of the page. This makes it obvious whether the browser you are using supports the format. Surely this pages deserves no less than a working example in the top corner? Preferably the same actual image. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.22.109 (talk) 16:47, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have created from the original animated SVG a bouncing ball MNG counterpart with imagemagick with transparent background and white background (These examples are compressed with bzip2). With a PNG (or maybe any other raster graphic that is supported by Imagemagick) file series, one can create a MNG file: 

convert -delay 15 -loop 0 -transparent white -dispose previous fubar*.png fubar.mng

Uploading these files to wiki commons seems to be not possible, because of the not supported file format. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boroli (talk • contribs) 10:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Animation not much used?[edit]

The web was pretty much full of animated GIFs in those days. The specification justifies the exclusion on the basis of consistency of support; one would know a PNG file was an image and a PNG viewer would view it rather than not knowing whether it was animated and whether a viewer might not support that. This same principle of consistency of support is borne out through the mechanism used for extensions in the spec. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.47.160.33 (talk) 11:19, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MNG?[edit]

I can't even find sample images for it on the web, also I can't find official news since 4 years ago, this format is death, hope png drops it and choose APNG instead. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.200.209.2 (talk) 17:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By now, browsers have chosen APNG over MNG. Almost all major browsers support it (Edge being the exception), while none support MNG. This is all despite the PNG group officially rejecting APNG. I think this is currently not well reflected in the article. Benimation (talk) 13:51, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sony Ericsson phone references in the article[edit]

Would anyone care to take them out besides me? Sony Ericsson has been taken over and dissolved by its parent company Sony, becoming Sony Mobile. Ericsson now exists seperately

Besides http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_Xperia_S is the first Sony (no Ericsson) phone to be released in March 2012 and Sony has stated that they are only going to be working on smartphones and leaving those poor bricks behind :P

Also, having difficulty proving that those generic "recent Sony Ericsson phones" supported .mng format through online citations. Most searches reveal copies of this Wikipedia page as the only online source to claim this.

If nobody responds I'll be back to clean it up

R "David" Booth (talk) 06:18, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatives, as of Feb 2013[edit]

I've just edited the "Alternatives" section. Current text:

The most common alternatives are Animated GIF and Adobe Flash. Animated GIF images are restricted to 256 colors and are used in simple scenarios but are supported in all web browsers. Adobe Flash is a common alternative for creating complex and/or interactive animations and is natively supported by Internet Explorer 10 and Google Chrome.
In web pages, it is possible to create pseudo-animations by writing JavaScript code that loads still PNG or JPEG images of each frame and displays them one by one for a specified time interval. Apart from requiring the user to have JavaScript support and choose not to disable it, this method can be CPU and bandwidth intensive for pages with more than one image, large images, or high framerates, and does not allow the animation to be saved in one image file or posted on image-based sites such as flickr or imageboards.
Some web browsers support APNG, a non-standard extension to PNG for simple GIF-like animations. Another alternative is SVG images with embedded PNG or JPEG graphics, using SVG animation (if supported) or JavaScript to flip between images. <!--As of 2013-->Internet Explorer supports neither APNG nor SVG animation.<ref>Can I use Animated PNG? and Can I use SVG SMIL animation?, Alexis Deveria, CanIUse.com. Accessed 5 Feb 2013</ref>
Another approach uses CSS 3 features, notably CSS Animation, which now has some level of support in most major web browsers. CSS Sprites (providing several images as tiles in a single large image file) can be used as animations by varying which part of the large image is visible using CSS Animation or JavaScript.

My comments:

  1. In the third para, the ref tells you which browsers support APNG and/or SVG animations.
  2. APNG is not a viable alternative. (It is supported only in Firefox, which uses it internally, and Opera.)
  3. SVG with declarative animation might catch on if Microsoft enhance IE to support SVG animation.
  4. SVG with Javascript animation is technically viable, but websites will find it much easier to use DHTML (the second paragraph) instead.
  5. Browser vendors are planning to support CSS3 animations and CSS3 transitions, which allow some really cool effects with a few lines of CSS. Moreover, it is much easier for web developers to learn a few new CSS properties than SVG or Canvas 2D or whatever. So I predict that CSS3 animations will take off in a big way.
  6. See WP:CRYSTAL.

We could delete some of this section. We probably should delete the sentence about APNG. IIRC, I'm the editor who first mentioned SVG as an alternative, but I'd now be happy to see that sentence deleted. What do other editors think? Cheers, CWC 13:05, 5 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Outdated information.[edit]

There's no mention of Safari, or Chrome (which is REALLY surprising) and there's no reference to Photoshop's support for this format either, I'd test it on all three apps, but I can't find an example image on google (Google doesn't recognize filetype:mng) and this article doesn't even have any example images. Bumblebritches57 (talk) 22:01, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

The notability of the JPEG Network Graphics (JNG) stub is apparently mostly based on Wikipedia, if Googlebot doesn't lie—of course this premise is already wrong and therefore "proving" anything including its opposite. Merging JNG into MNG might help to rescue the JNG stub. –Be..anyone (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What happened?[edit]

What's the stumbling block? Is MNG not as efficient as GIF in its niche? Is the reference library unsecure? The article seems to be full of conditionally true assertions that the format has been widely adopted, and short on analysis.

By the way, for those asking, you may find some images here. Stock Mac OS X and Firefox cannot view them. Potatoswatter (talk) 11:00, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

MNG is straight up da bomb and owns gif and apng. It's making a huge come back and use will be at an all time high in 2015. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:470:4:263::2 (talk) 06:52, 15 November 2014

To the person above that didn't sign their comment: you were kinda wrong.. APNG is now (2017) supported by almost all major browsers, while MNG is supported by none.. Benimation (talk) 14:00, 25 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Lack of examples unlike in GIF[edit]

This page needs animation image examples like GIF. IndiaKomchi✉☆ 08:41, 16 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Multiple-image Network Graphics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (February 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Multiple-image Network Graphics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:12, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Multiple-image_Network_Graphics&oldid=1201623840"