I work with Footage Firm and we are getting ready to create some fire/explosion/smoke effects with transparency and alpha channels. We are just trying to decide if we should export them as PNG or Animation codec.
Which is the most universally compatible? Which is the most preferred codec for distribution amongst all of the editing software that's out there?
Re: PNG vs. Animation by Dave LaRonde on May 4, 2011 at 9:33:51 pm
[Mallory Jones]"Which is the most universally compatible?"
Animation has been a Quicktime codec since Apple invented QT. It's on every QT-equipped machine on the planet. It's lossless, but it's an 8-bit codec.
PNG is newer -- not as widespread, but getting there -- and I believe it's 10-bit in addition to being lossless. The file sizes also tend to be smaller than Animation files. But for things like animated lower-thirds, with a whole lot of nothing on most of the screen, an Animation file can be downright compact.
[Mallory Jones]"Which is the most preferred codec for distribution amongst all of the editing software that's out there? "
Here's my personal guess: it's probably Photo JPEG at 100% quality... but no alpha channel support.
This wasn't a whole lot of help, was it?
Sr. Promotion Producer
KCRG-TV (ABC) Cedar Rapids, IA