1. 15
  1.  

  2. 2

    I think this probably just needs the graphics tag, the programming and web tags can probably go.

    Awesome article!

    1. 2

      It’s totally not about graphics though! :)

      1. 1

        I think that was a joke, but I can’t tell.

        rubs chin

        1. 3

          It’s about file format details. The fact that it’s graphical file formats is essentially irrelevant to why this is interesting; it doesn’t even talk about how different compression strategies are suitable for different purposes, except for noting things like “a black pixel coincidentally comes out one byte smaller than a white pixel here”.

          They are really cool details that, as a programmer, I enjoyed reading about. I don’t think a graphic designer would find this relevant to their work, and I am dubious that it would have practical impact for anyone doing graphics programming either, although maybe by bringing formats to people’s attention. The reason it’s interesting is because it’s about encodings, though, not because it’s about images.

          Anyway, I guess I did mean to be a bit opaque, because I thought it was an amusing point to think about, but realistically I should explain. Hope this helps.

          1. 2

            That’s why I like Ange Albertini’s posters and Proof of Concepts - he does some really funky stuff with file formats.

            1. 2

              I get it now, thank you for explaining!

              I think it should keep the graphics tag (though I now agree that the programming tag would also be good), pretty sure those interested in graphics would find parts of this interesting, like the explanation of headers and stuff. :)

              1. 2

                That makes sense, yeah. :)