Is PNG the most economically sound file format to store pictures in?

Posted by raoulsson on Stack Overflow See other posts from Stack Overflow or by raoulsson
Published on 2010-03-19T14:56:25Z Indexed on 2010/03/19 15:31 UTC
Read the original article Hit count: 202

Filed under:
|
|
|
|

I am looking for an economically sound solution to store pictures long time. I read about the PNG file format that it has superior characteristics compared to JPEG, namely in these categories:

  • no patents, no licenses, no royalities
  • no quality loss
  • yet compressed

I have a lot of big ESP's from PhotoShop that contain tons of metadata, like layers and color profiles that I don't need to store (those were handy for the designer, when he worked with it). I want to convert these images without that hidden data, to a new target file format.

Another side condition to my question is that the target file format has to be displayable in the browser. So I guess my options are limited anyway: GIF, JPEG, PNG.

Am I missing something or is PNG the best fit for my case?

© Stack Overflow or respective owner

Related posts about file-format

Related posts about picture