File :-(, x, )
Dunes... Anonymous
Taken near Dunhuang, Gansu Province, China.

Sorry, no EXIF guys :-(
>> Anonymous
SPICE MUST FLOW
>> Anonymous
cool.

But why PNG?
>> Anonymous
>>71116

Probably taken in raw and he didn't have the heart to see the fine detail of his photo get glazed over.
>> Anonymous
besides, it loaded fast so what's the problem?
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>71121
Just why not use appropriate image formats?

<-- Use 4:4:4 JPEG if detail is very important. Lossless formats are for saving intermediate results.
>> Anonymous
I hat eyou
>> Anonymous
>>71131
BUT LOOK AT ALL TEH QUALITY YOUY LOST IN THE PICHER NOW
>> Anonymous
Very nice pic. I like dunes.

also Anon appreciates lossless PNG.
>> Anonymous
lovely photo.. i'd like to see a larger version though

and png is fine as long as it's not over 1mb
>> Anonymous
Fail for PNG.
>> Anonymous
...i dont get it. whats wrong with png???

its not like bandwidth is a problem. are you people complaining because your stuck using win95 with a 2gb hard drive or something??

geez my fellow anonymous complains alot. png is lossless, so i like it.

hard drives are cheap, so buy a bigger one and stop contaminating 4chan with your endless whining.

sage because im just flaming my fellow anons
>> Anonymous
>>71149
.png doesn't save EXIF. That's my main issue with it. Also for sharing pictures, it usually increases the filesize so it is less convienent for me to view on an imageboard.
>> Anonymous
>>71149
> its not like bandwidth is a problem.
What? Since when bandwidth is not an issue? 4chan costs around 2000 USD a month!
>> sage
>>71149
I pay quite a bit for every gig I go over my monthly limit. My hard drive is hueg (like xbox), but that's because I replaced a dying one and bought the most economical size.
>> Anonymous !MjcMqTX/iM
>>71222
Exactly.

Also, lossless is pointless on an interweb image board anyhow.
>> Anonymous
>>71149

Bitch please, don't pretend you can notice a difference between the PNG and the JPEG posted in this thread.

Maybe if he posted a high res version, I could see the point, or if it had large blocks of colour and transparency, and wasn't actually a photo at all.