I'm wondering if it's generally safe to use .png's when I need an image with alpha capabilities. i.e. when I'm using one image over another, or implementing a shadow effect over a bg image, etc.
I can just use .gif's (providing I don't need varying levels of alpha transparency. I'm sure we're all familiar with the jagged white pixels around some web animations) or .jpg, but they're a lot less convenient for obvious reasons.
The only thing that's making me wonder is that I remember previous versions of IE don't display the alpha layers of .png's, and if a substantial portion of web users haven't updated to a newer version of IE yet, or moved to Firefox, any design I use .png's in will appear really tacky.
Hi TK , welcome to the
Hi TK , welcome to the forum, I noticed your post in 'Site Discussion' glad the forum sign up was speedy
First port of call on a forum after 'Lurking' when asking a question is to do a quick check through the archives to see what if anything has already been said on the subject. Alpha transparency has been discussed quite often so there is some useful info to be gleamed from past threads, of course these threads may well throw up further questions in which case do ask for any clarification you require on points, in this thread you have started.
TK-425 wrote:The only thing
The only thing that's making me wonder is that I remember previous versions of IE don't display the alpha layers of .png's
IE6 does actually support alpha transparency on 8-bit PNGs to a certain extent. For more info:
you can also use js to get
you can also use js to get alpha transparency in ie6, ie7 supports it
Hi Hugo. Thanks for the
Hi Hugo. Thanks for the reply. I apologize for not searching first. I should have thought of that.
Anyway, thank you (Hugo, Tyssen and thursday0384) for answering my question. I think I'll just stick with using part of the background with a flattened image.