On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 23:35 +0200, Jaap Haitsma wrote:

Hi,

I want to make an animated gif of the gnome throbber of nautilus. I got the original png which contains a rectangle containing the 35 frames. I cut these out and put them in a seperate layer in GIMP. If I then play the animation in GIMP or save it as an animated GIF and then play it. The toes of the gnome foot seem to leave something behind See:
http://ftp.haitsma.org/gnome-throbber.gif

Looks like you're using combine as a frame disposal method while you need replace. Also note, that GIF cannot handle alpha channel, so you'll still end up having aliased contour of the gnome throbber. If you know your target background color, you can flatten or semi-flatten prior to indexing.

cheers

Hi,

Jakub Steiner writes:

Looks like you're using combine as a frame disposal method while you need replace. Also note, that GIF cannot handle alpha channel, so you'll still end up having aliased contour of the gnome throbber. If you know your target background color, you can flatten or semi-flatten prior to indexing.

Or use a proper file format for animations such as MNG. GIF is a piece of crap and should have died a long time ago already.

Sven

True, but it's still widely used and has more support than PNG. It's the perennial web designer's nightmare - you hate IE but you have to code for it anyway because everyone uses it. The compromise between what should be done and what has to be done. In the same way, PNG is not as widely and well-supported as it should be, at least in IE.

Tom

On Monday 12 Jul 2004 08:30, Sven Neumann wrote:

Hi,

Jakub Steiner writes:

Looks like you're using combine as a frame disposal method while you need replace. Also note, that GIF cannot handle alpha channel, so you'll still end up having aliased contour of the gnome throbber. If you know your target background color, you can flatten or semi-flatten prior to indexing.

Or use a proper file format for animations such as MNG. GIF is a piece of crap and should have died a long time ago already.

Sven

Hi,

Tom Cole writes:

True, but it's still widely used and has more support than PNG. It's the perennial web designer's nightmare - you hate IE but you have to code for it anyway because everyone uses it. The compromise between what should be done and what has to be done. In the same way, PNG is not as widely and well-supported as it should be, at least in IE.

Sort of true but things will never change if everyone thinks and acts this way. Only if you web-designers start to write spec-compliant pages and use the proper formats, only then will the browsers be fixed to render these pages correctly.

Sven

Sven Neumann wrote:

Hi,

Tom Cole writes:

True, but it's still widely used and has more support than PNG. It's the perennial web designer's nightmare - you hate IE but you have to code for it anyway because everyone uses it. The compromise between what should be done and what has to be done. In the same way, PNG is not as widely and well-supported as it should be, at least in IE.

Sort of true but things will never change if everyone thinks and acts this way. Only if you web-designers start to write spec-compliant pages and use the proper formats, only then will the browsers be fixed to render these pages correctly.

Go a step further. When you identify a browser that does not support current standards (typically, IE), let the user know, either with a popup or such. How many times have you seen similar messages telling you, you MUST use IE for a particular website?