2018

There's a certain magic when you think your cuckbrowser can't render THE BEST VIDEO FORMAT© but then you expand and it actually works.

You know better. By using Microsoft Windows, a user voluntarily gives up per privacy. By using a system that has security, you make the state return to targeted surveillance, which is appropriate when there's a warrant.

Traditional animation. Lossless video codecs generally do not use delta frame compression and thus are unable to compete size-wise. I suspect that mp4 might not actually be lossless, in most test cases I've performed lossless x264 can't even get smaller than double the size of a corresponding lossless animated PNG.

Attached: rise of the megabanks.png (600x535, 345.36K)

Good example here actually:
>>>/apng/585

Lossless animated PNG versus x264 in lossless mode (the best lossless codec among x264, x265, VP8, and VP9 if you're wondering). Lagarith can't compete with lossless x264 either because file compression isn't its main goal.

Animated PNG still wins. By a lot.

Attached: R-90 hyperspace.mp4 (256x224 85.45 KB, 32.63K)

Even at the [code]-preset placebo[\code] setting, lossless x264 still can't win. Animated PNG can tweak its compression schemes as well if one has the the patience.

Attached: hyper-zopfli-i50.png (256x224 31.48 KB, 52.5K)

Aww fuck whatever.

I'm trying to replicate your lossless MP4 and having some difficulty. Here's the smallest I could get it. It is smaller than the APNG however, so okay there's a point for video formats. It really depends on your animation which technique gives a smaller file size.

Attached: animation-placebo.mp4 (650x400, 278.32K)

IIRC edge does this autocomplete adress bar and it points to /hebe/ board and pedophile websites though the user just installed it.

It's Macroshit® Wangblows™ Craperating Shitstem, user.

...

Your sales pitch for using Edge is "It has spyware, who cares".

clever

Careful with dat Edge OP

Get the fuck out of here you literal shill

lol i bet you all vote Trump

i feel like i'm being trolled

I hope you're joking, funcbro.

You can do the same shit with animated SVG and it will look 10 times better than your attachment.

This isn't even bait anymore.

Attached: 1473270378726.jpg (600x900, 60.45K)

Decided to try doing the same with VP9. Here’s the “mathematically” lossless one.

Attached: lossless.webm (650x400, 293.64K)

And here are the ones made with constant quality mode.

Attached: crf_20.webm (650x400 126.83 KB, 294.58K)

(cont.)

Attached: crf_50.webm (650x400 38.52 KB, 58.8K)

(cont.)

Attached: crf_60.webm (650x400, 16.08K)

This isn't a very good test case for APNG because it can't utilize the main advantage of PNG, i.e. compressing flat areas. on the other hand has such a limited palette that it might as well be a gif.

Most of the time that video is larger than apng (in my experience at least) is when it's already an abnormally small filesize, like gif and png but more pronounced. For video vs apng in this situation it comes down to whether you want compatibility or a few extra kilobytes of storage. See the filesizes are off by a whopping 50kb.

That as a gif is twice as large as the apng.

Attached: wojak.png (38x38 226 B, 193)

Attached: E1OK9cGke_XTAcmaNN88mMxm4egFuMQxFjIK9LP7t-o.png (576x768, 294.96K)