<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Fixing PNG Gamma</title>
	<atom:link href="http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/</link>
	<description>Adventures in web and graphic design</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Aug 2010 07:09:33 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Sagar</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-104374</link>
		<dc:creator>Sagar</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 May 2009 09:00:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-104374</guid>
		<description>Great tool...... 
Thanks...........</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great tool&#8230;&#8230;<br />
Thanks&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;..</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dirk</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-69128</link>
		<dc:creator>Dirk</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Aug 2008 14:07:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-69128</guid>
		<description>Yeah and Hooray!
Thanks for the info, I knew it was a PNG IE problem, but I had no idea how to fix it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah and Hooray!<br />
Thanks for the info, I knew it was a PNG IE problem, but I had no idea how to fix it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ScottBruin</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-35545</link>
		<dc:creator>ScottBruin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 16 Dec 2007 02:15:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-35545</guid>
		<description>Mac OS X users,

Try this:  http://www.shealanforshaw.com/gammaslamma-11-update-now-available/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mac OS X users,</p>
<p>Try this:  <a href="http://www.shealanforshaw.com/gammaslamma-11-update-now-available/" rel="nofollow">http://www.shealanforshaw.com/gammaslamma-11-update-now-available/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark Abucayon</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-34276</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Abucayon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Dec 2007 05:38:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-34276</guid>
		<description>You have a point right there. Thanks for this.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have a point right there. Thanks for this.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-6911</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 23:53:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-6911</guid>
		<description>@armateur6 -

&lt;blockquote&gt;I still think that it’s eminently suited to web reproduction of fine art.&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I see where you are coming from. I misunderstood you original comment - I thought you were suggesting that PNG would be a good format for professional photographers to reproduce their work in print!

For anyone selling artwork or stock photography over the web, PNG + gamma correction should be a real boon, and if browsers automatically strip gamma from PNGs it is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

An ideal solution would be if browsers all respected the gamma value contained in a PNG, including the possibility that there is no gamma value specified. Coupled with that, it would be great if graphics applications such as Photoshop gave designers the option to embed or strip the gamma value from a PNG during the creation process. That would eliminate the need for cleanup after the fact using 3rd party applications like TweakPNG.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@armateur6 -</p>
<blockquote><p>I still think that it’s eminently suited to web reproduction of fine art.</p></blockquote>
<p>I see where you are coming from. I misunderstood you original comment &#8211; I thought you were suggesting that PNG would be a good format for professional photographers to reproduce their work in print!</p>
<p>For anyone selling artwork or stock photography over the web, PNG + gamma correction should be a real boon, and if browsers automatically strip gamma from PNGs it is like throwing out the baby with the bathwater.</p>
<p>An ideal solution would be if browsers all respected the gamma value contained in a PNG, including the possibility that there is no gamma value specified. Coupled with that, it would be great if graphics applications such as Photoshop gave designers the option to embed or strip the gamma value from a PNG during the creation process. That would eliminate the need for cleanup after the fact using 3rd party applications like TweakPNG.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: armateur6</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-6906</link>
		<dc:creator>armateur6</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 22:39:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-6906</guid>
		<description>Hey Jonathan -- no worries, I appreciate the correction. And for digging me out of the deluge!

I certainly didn&#039;t mean to imply that it should be used for print; but I still think that it&#039;s eminently suited to web reproduction of fine art. The problem, of course, is the vast disparity between mac and PC gamma, and PNG at least exposed the issue. So it really IS an &quot;advanced&quot; feature -- it&#039;s just MORE advanced and exposing the flaws (lack of correction) in everything else!

Don&#039;t get me wrong, I would much prefer to see browsers tackle gamma correction, but I really doubt that will ever happen. In the meantime I think more people in the photographic and art community should look to PNG. Cheers!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Jonathan &#8212; no worries, I appreciate the correction. And for digging me out of the deluge!</p>
<p>I certainly didn&#8217;t mean to imply that it should be used for print; but I still think that it&#8217;s eminently suited to web reproduction of fine art. The problem, of course, is the vast disparity between mac and PC gamma, and PNG at least exposed the issue. So it really IS an &#8220;advanced&#8221; feature &#8212; it&#8217;s just MORE advanced and exposing the flaws (lack of correction) in everything else!</p>
<p>Don&#8217;t get me wrong, I would much prefer to see browsers tackle gamma correction, but I really doubt that will ever happen. In the meantime I think more people in the photographic and art community should look to PNG. Cheers!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-6886</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 19:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-6886</guid>
		<description>@amateur6: I hate to tell you this, but PNG was designed as replacement for the GIF format, which makes it a web format. It also doesn&#039;t support CMYK color spaces, which makes is unsuitable for print production work. By the way - you should consider posting under a different handle - because of the word &quot;amateur&quot; your comment was tagged as spam as I almost missed it in the deluge.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@amateur6: I hate to tell you this, but PNG was designed as replacement for the GIF format, which makes it a web format. It also doesn&#8217;t support CMYK color spaces, which makes is unsuitable for print production work. By the way &#8211; you should consider posting under a different handle &#8211; because of the word &#8220;amateur&#8221; your comment was tagged as spam as I almost missed it in the deluge.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: amateur6</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-6857</link>
		<dc:creator>amateur6</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:46:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-6857</guid>
		<description>Just wanted to clarify that, as far as I can tell, none of  this has any bearing on the application where PNG was obviously designed to shine: photography (or illustration). Gamma differences can absolutely kill subtleties in artwork, and so the PNG fix really IS a good thing -- it&#039;s just that web designers (and I am one) have a tendency to look for the ONE format solution to their problems. Or maybe PNG was originally promoted this way -- I don&#039;t recall. But saying &quot;hooray, we can strip the gamma correction and PNGs will be better&quot; seems to ignore the fact that it really CAN be a help, in the right circumstances.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just wanted to clarify that, as far as I can tell, none of  this has any bearing on the application where PNG was obviously designed to shine: photography (or illustration). Gamma differences can absolutely kill subtleties in artwork, and so the PNG fix really IS a good thing &#8212; it&#8217;s just that web designers (and I am one) have a tendency to look for the ONE format solution to their problems. Or maybe PNG was originally promoted this way &#8212; I don&#8217;t recall. But saying &#8220;hooray, we can strip the gamma correction and PNGs will be better&#8221; seems to ignore the fact that it really CAN be a help, in the right circumstances.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jonathan</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-184</link>
		<dc:creator>Jonathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Dec 2006 10:14:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-184</guid>
		<description>@EZ: I&#039;m not convinced PNG is &#039;ready for prime time&#039; just yet, but it&#039;s nice to know that there are options available. I can&#039;t wait until IE6 and Safari 1.3 are forgotten and we can start to use the PNG format freely. It will be really interesting to see the way web design changes once transparency becomes part of the designer&#039;s repertoire...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@EZ: I&#8217;m not convinced PNG is &#8216;ready for prime time&#8217; just yet, but it&#8217;s nice to know that there are options available. I can&#8217;t wait until IE6 and Safari 1.3 are forgotten and we can start to use the PNG format freely. It will be really interesting to see the way web design changes once transparency becomes part of the designer&#8217;s repertoire&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ephram Zerb</title>
		<link>http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/comment-page-1/#comment-170</link>
		<dc:creator>Ephram Zerb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Dec 2006 01:51:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://f6design.com/journal/2006/12/01/fixing-png-gamma/#comment-170</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the post, didn&#039;t realize that there was such a solution.  My approach to the stated problem was to abandon PNGs and go back to using GIFs.  Now I just need to rationalize using Microsoft&#039;s &quot;AlphaImageLoader Filter&quot; to fix the transparency functionality to fully redeem the PNG format.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the post, didn&#8217;t realize that there was such a solution.  My approach to the stated problem was to abandon PNGs and go back to using GIFs.  Now I just need to rationalize using Microsoft&#8217;s &#8220;AlphaImageLoader Filter&#8221; to fix the transparency functionality to fully redeem the PNG format.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
