Some very old (and stripped down) notes I have, from a beginners course I used to teach on web graphics and image formats. (it does loose a little something in translation with the limited formatting we can use here).

GIF: (Graphics Interchange Format)
Limited to 256 colors and less.
Recommended - 72 dpi.
8-bit color planes


Originally designed by Compuserve. June 1987

It used a compression scheme called LZW.
Gif utilizes a compression method which uses a particular algorithm. This algorithm is copyrighted by Unisys. Any software which supports the format must obtain the rights to use the format but all users are free to use it.
Because of this issue..., a new format called PNG (Portable Network Graphics) is slowly infiltrating, and is expected to eventually replace the GIF.


How it compresses...

1. It compresses repeated patterns of pixels in an image.
   
2. The more repeated patterns there are in an image, the more it can be compressed. When the image is decompressed it is
   exactly the same as the original image.
   
3. Example:
   
   If the code looks like this - (@ 42-bytes)
   1 5 6 4 6 7 9 1 2 5 6 9 8 4 5 8 9 2 5 6 9 8 5 6 7 2 5 6 9 6 1 5 6 4 6 7 9 7 8 2 5 6
   
   The conversion looks for repeating strings of more than 3 numbers -
   1 5 6 4 6 7 9 1 2 5 6 9 8 4 5 8 9 2 5 6 9 8 5 6 7 2 5 6 9 6 1 5 6 4 6 7 9 7 8 2 5 6
   
   It then replaces the strings with a "token". It refers to which number it repeats and for how many characters -
   1 5 6 4 6 7 9 1 2 5 6 9 8 4 5 8 9 [9,5] 5 6 7 [9,4] 6 [1,7] 7 8 [9,3]
   
   
4. Each "token" takes 2 bytes. having eliminated several repeating characters, our code is now only 31-bytes
   

• GIF uses Lossless, Pattern Matching Compression
  
• It compresses repeated patterns of pixels in an image.
  
• The more repeated patterns there are in an image, the more it can be compressed.
  
• When the image is decompressed it is exactly the same as the original image
  

Fake! Doctored. I can see pixels. Source(s) please?

I'm a doctor, and I can confirm the cat doesn't have enough pixels.

Screenshot won't help since it's a monitor thing, not videocard. I tried to take photo of the monitor but it doesn't show up there. It is a really faint jiggling/fuzziness of sharp contrast page elements that are near such background. Like word "sarcasm" next to the checkbox when writing comments has vertical fuzziness.
It is kinda similar to when you connect some LCD monitors with VGA cable their menus have options like "pixel clock" and "phase"...Except I use DVI and can't adjust those.

Comment hidden because you are ignoring dag. (show it anyway)

How can you tell? The pixels?

I hear WoW on PC is also better... Ziiing!!

>> ^Lolthien:

>> ^ForgedReality:
It looks like crap because it's on a console, you dickwags. It's super pixelated because it's probably 720p at best. In 6 to 8 months when it comes out on PC, it will look much, much better. Of course, it will still suffer from consolitis, and be ruined by horrid, invasive DRM, so it won't be worth playing, but at least it will look a lot better.

Have you guys played any 'Console ports' lately? Sleeping Dogs is outstanding on PC, Dishonored is likewise outstanding, and of course Skyrim is ten times better on PC. All these games were marketed for consoles, but their PC versions got a lot of love and it shows. Hell, even the latest Deus Ex was pretty awesome on PC.

>> ^ForgedReality:

It looks like crap because it's on a console, you dickwags. It's super pixelated because it's probably 720p at best. In 6 to 8 months when it comes out on PC, it will look much, much better. Of course, it will still suffer from consolitis, and be ruined by horrid, invasive DRM, so it won't be worth playing, but at least it will look a lot better.


Have you guys played any 'Console ports' lately? Sleeping Dogs is outstanding on PC, Dishonored is likewise outstanding, and of course Skyrim is ten times better on PC. All these games were marketed for consoles, but their PC versions got a lot of love and it shows. Hell, even the latest Deus Ex was pretty awesome on PC.

It looks like crap because it's on a console, you dickwags. It's super pixelated because it's probably 720p at best. In 6 to 8 months when it comes out on PC, it will look much, much better. Of course, it will still suffer from consolitis, and be ruined by horrid, invasive DRM, so it won't be worth playing, but at least it will look a lot better.

>> ^Nexxus:

That's the way I react when people hold their cellphone cameras vertical instead of horizontal. Don't do it people!!


People complain about this constantly, but I think it's more a problem with youtube and other video sites than with the cell phones.

Holding a phone in portrait mode, you're capturing just as many pixels. For some scenes you might be capturing a more relevant set of pixels, as well.

It's just that the videos are needlessly squished because the Youtube player won't resize accordingly.

The screen on the iPhone 5 is very close to sRGB, which is optimal, but only because that's what most content is designed for. If you count subpixels, it has a higher resolution than the 1280*720 pentile displays.

I think the display on my phone is 96*96 pixels :-)

Sorry, perhaps I should of worded that point differently, I meant that a ppi that allows for retina (android equiv) is sufficient, after this point we need to compare screens on more noticeable differences. The S3 and the iPhone5 are both at 306ppi, the differences is screen size/resolution, colour, rendering algorithms and screen tech (pentile vs IPS). Which is a preference, I have no problem with you liking larger phones, this is just not a point of advantage or disadvantage you can target as a phone fault, it is a user choice. Some people also prefer looking at over-saturated colours, they find them more "real" or "vivid" etc, that's all fine.

The other points I think we can leave as is.

Yes iTunes is a heaping pile of shit, I'm not about to defend it, I got my N7 with Jellybean and saw how refined the Play experience is, switching accounts on the fly, loads content for that account etc. It was simply put, light years ahead of the syncing bullshit that Apple puts me through. In fact the N7 is really the first Android device I've been actively recommending to people, it is undeniably a solid good product, I can not fault it (other than lacklustre 3rd party support but I won't be blaming Android for that).

But really, these days, you can ignore iTunes and I'm guessing a lot of people do or are content with what it does. To stick with my mum, her iPad has never plugged in to a PC (except when she couldn't do OTA updates but she didn't have to deal with that), she does everything on the device. In fact, she wouldn't go near a computer, Apple or otherwise, she has absolutely no interest in them fullstop. My mother-in-law is the same, it took me about a year to convince her to pick-up an iPad, now she does her shopping online, uses email etc but she has no desire to touch anything else and still won't step out of the apps she knows. These two weren't a market just a few years ago, you wouldn't even dream of bothering with them.

I don't know what it is that makes it so appealing but Apple seems to and they focus all their attention on it. I know also this is anecdotal (but you don't have to look far to see more). Everything you see isn't aimed at us, I find most Apple's marketing over the top and cheesy, this is why I can find this video funny even if I do prefer Apple products, it just isn't for us. The "lens...cover" line had me in tears.

I know we like to think we can understand how non-tech people work but we simply don't, I have been teaching the basics to people for a long time and I'll still freely admit I'm still bewildered by how little people actually understand. They're not stupid people, we just take it all for granted, it is a different mindset entirely and is why the tech world has such a hard time understanding Apple. For instance, do you know how useful iOS is to the accessibly challenged? It is light years ahead of Android or any body else, it isn't even a choice for this market, no matter what the other phones offer. iOS is the only realistic option.

I've probably gone a tangent here but it all comes back to why Apple is what it is and why I try to defend against attacks that compare it at a tech race level. I don't want the world to go back to what it was, there is room in the market for the needs of everyone to be met.

>> ^spoco2:

@yellowc A fine rebuttal sir, except lacking in a great deal of thinking things through.
First you say the screen on the phone is the best due to colour, ppi and fonts, and then say that ppi doesn't matter. (Higher resolution in a smaller screen = higher ppi) Personally? I think this pixel density bullshit is some finely crafted bullshit by Apple to create a metric that no-one cared about before, and really kind of shouldn't, but they tout it because they like to make sure they win it... so, their 4" screen with its weird 1136 x 640 resolution is apparently better than a 4.64" screen with 1280x720 (so native 720p HD)? I too wasn't sold on larger screens. My last phone was 3.5" just like the current iPhone, and I thought I wouldn't want a phone with a larger screen as then it wouldn't fit in my pocket, and would be a pain in the butt. Then I tried on the Galaxy Nexus in store and found it fit in my pocket better (by being thinner) and was soooo much nicer for viewing content on than 3.5"
I said myself that I'd only ever used NFC once, don't much care about it. Can see that it could be cool having stickers/pads in your car and on your bedside table to automatically put your phone into various modes based on what you're doing, but I've cared so little I haven't ordered the tags to try it.
Video calling... who actually uses it? As I said, we've had it here in Australia for 9 years. Most feature and smart phones have supported it. I've been able to do it for years. Have I once felt the need? Nope.
I'm not saying there's anything wrong with iOS as an operating system, what I'm saying is that it LOOKS amazingly old, feels really quite antiquated. I look forward to Apple redesigning it and making it fresh again. Without being an Android fanboy, I find the look and design of ICS and Jellybean Android to be so much more fresh than iOS. This is nothing to do with functionality, just look, something which Apple could change so easily, it's odd that they are letting it get so stale.
In terms of Apple 'understanding' the regular Joe... what I don't get is how such a large number of my friends have ended up completely wiping their entire iTunes library because of the insanely stupid way in which iTunes handles moving your device between computers and how it handles syncing them. That is not user friendly, has been going on for years, and yet never addressed.
Horses for courses. Look, there are plenty of reasons to go with an iDevice... but the ever burgeoning market share of Android (now more than Apple) demonstrates that not everyone wants to be locked into the Apple ecosphere.

@yellowc A fine rebuttal sir, except lacking in a great deal of thinking things through.

First you say the screen on the phone is the best due to colour, ppi and fonts, and then say that ppi doesn't matter. (Higher resolution in a smaller screen = higher ppi) Personally? I think this pixel density bullshit is some finely crafted bullshit by Apple to create a metric that no-one cared about before, and really kind of shouldn't, but they tout it because they like to make sure they win it... so, their 4" screen with its weird 1136 x 640 resolution is apparently better than a 4.64" screen with 1280x720 (so native 720p HD)? I too wasn't sold on larger screens. My last phone was 3.5" just like the current iPhone, and I thought I wouldn't want a phone with a larger screen as then it wouldn't fit in my pocket, and would be a pain in the butt. Then I tried on the Galaxy Nexus in store and found it fit in my pocket better (by being thinner) and was soooo much nicer for viewing content on than 3.5"

I said myself that I'd only ever used NFC once, don't much care about it. Can see that it could be cool having stickers/pads in your car and on your bedside table to automatically put your phone into various modes based on what you're doing, but I've cared so little I haven't ordered the tags to try it.

Video calling... who actually uses it? As I said, we've had it here in Australia for 9 years. Most feature and smart phones have supported it. I've been able to do it for years. Have I once felt the need? Nope.

I'm not saying there's anything wrong with iOS as an operating system, what I'm saying is that it LOOKS amazingly old, feels really quite antiquated. I look forward to Apple redesigning it and making it fresh again. Without being an Android fanboy, I find the look and design of ICS and Jellybean Android to be so much more fresh than iOS. This is nothing to do with functionality, just look, something which Apple could change so easily, it's odd that they are letting it get so stale.

In terms of Apple 'understanding' the regular Joe... what I don't get is how such a large number of my friends have ended up completely wiping their entire iTunes library because of the insanely stupid way in which iTunes handles moving your device between computers and how it handles syncing them. That is not user friendly, has been going on for years, and yet never addressed.

Horses for courses. Look, there are plenty of reasons to go with an iDevice... but the ever burgeoning market share of Android (now more than Apple) demonstrates that not everyone wants to be locked into the Apple ecosphere.

This made me really nostalgic. Not just the pixel art, but the music too.

Playing the SNES in a video game haze to a background of melancholic 90's rock, buoyant punk and grunge apathy; smoking too much; drinking cheap beer and vodka (and whatever else we could get our hands on).

Waking up on an old sofa chair bathed in dimly flashing colours and quiet, looping chip music.

Super Metroid; Prince of Persia; A Link to the Past; Secret of Mana; Mortal Kombat and Super Mario Kart.

Spider-Man and Wolverine comics, and Kerrang! on the floor.

And an otherwise, abject poverty.


Seems like another life now.

>> ^Auger8:

So if it was a dead pixel why does it disappear behind her head and then reappear as she moves her head left and right and then stay stationary in the same exact place even after she is whisked away. Sorry but it looks a bullet hole to me. Damn close too.
>> ^shuac:
>> ^dedstick:
Watch just above her left ear at 0:05 and a dot appears which seems to coincide with the sound of a muffled pop....

Don't be silly, it's obviously a dead pixel. <eye roll>



Back. And to the left.

So if it was a dead pixel why does it disappear behind her head and then reappear as she moves her head left and right and then stay stationary in the same exact place even after she is whisked away. Sorry but it looks a bullet hole to me. Damn close too.
>> ^shuac:

>> ^dedstick:
Watch just above her left ear at 0:05 and a dot appears which seems to coincide with the sound of a muffled pop....

Don't be silly, it's obviously a dead pixel. <eye roll>