Feature request: APNG support

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File	Select/drop/paste files here
* = required field	[▶ Show post options & limits] Confused? See the FAQ.

Embed	(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options	Do not bump (you can also write sage in the email field) Spoiler images (this replaces the thumbnails of your images with question marks)
Password	(For file and post deletion.)
Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, swf, pdf Max filesize is 8 MB. Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000. You may upload 5 per post.

File: 1455507580663-0.png (596.07 KB, 500x500, 1:1, 9fe50084426227645e8e726406….png)

File: 1455507580703-1.png (602.5 KB, 500x500, 1:1, 9e7b8b5abc7cb11da32db05671….png)

Feature request: APNG support Anonymous 02/15/16 (Mon) 03:39:40 No.2040

I have a fair amount of APNGs, but Hydrus only shows the first frame. Is it in the realm of possibility to get them working?

>pics related

hydrus_dev ## Board Owner 02/15/16 (Mon) 22:48:23 No.2044

File: 1455576503544.mp4 (810.99 KB, 500x500, 1:1, a.mp4)

I am all for it, but as far as I know, my two image libaries, Pillow and OpenCV, don't support it. If you know a python library that takes an apng and can return resolution, frame_count, and frame_duration metadata and accurate bmps for each frame, then I can add it no problem.

EDIT: I just ran that through ffmpeg, which I use for more complicated video rendering, and it seemed to understand it. I don't remember it ever supporting apng, so maybe I am remembering that wrong, or it is new. I will make a note for next week to see if I can support it that way.

Anonymous 02/16/16 (Tue) 20:55:23 No.2048

>>2044

>APNG support through ffmpeg

Hmm, that would be an interesting way to do it.

I actually think that ffmpeg supports all popular image types (PNG, JPEG{ XR,2000}, WebP, GIF, TIFF, BMP, etc) in addition to being a video powerhouse, so if the other two image libraries end up not working out well you might be able to switch to ffmpeg completely and be OK.

I don't know if that'd be feasible or not, but it's something to think about.

Anonymous 02/20/16 (Sat) 17:33:34 No.2063

>>2040

Why not convert it to webm? Since it basically took the place of what apngs were supposed to do and is quickly becoming the new standard.

Anonymous 02/21/16 (Sun) 00:15:02 No.2070

File: 1456013703088.webm (4.88 MB, 500x500, 1:1, out.webm)

>>2063

1. Lossless WebMs are huge. APNGs, while equally as lossless, are not. webm related

2. WebM is a video format, like MP4. Not an image format.

3. If anything were to replace APNG, it would be something like WebP or FLIF

Anonymous 02/22/16 (Mon) 01:55:47 No.2082

>>2070

eh.

1. [lossless] APNGs are also huge. Maybe not as huge as lossless webm, but still ridiculous.

2. webm has basically alread entirely replaced gif, as far as the www is concerned. Desktop software is coming around to that notion- several image viewers already have webm support in the works. APNG, on the other hand. is ancient and has zero support from any given image viewer. APNG died years ago. Webm being "video" (or rather, using a technology commonly associated with video) is a meaningless distinction- even more meaningless when you consider almost no software can even open APNG, whereas webm already has more acceptance than APNG ever had, or ever will have.

3. Convert your existing APNGs to lossless mp4, don't create any more APNGs. Where there is (planned/existing) webm support, there is some push for mp4 support as well. Lossless x264 is significantly better than PNG compression.

We are in a transition state, where the logical conclusion is that all "video" and "animated image" content use the same technology, and are the same thing. It's already mostly here. Backing the lossless mp4 horse is going to pay off- backing APNG is definitely not.

hydrus_dev ## Board Owner 02/23/16 (Tue) 19:53:31 No.2093

File: 1456257211620.gif (700.86 KB, 736x547, 736:547, e38f95203048d427d0d713dc72….gif)

Unfortunately, it seems FFMPEG doesn't give 'Duration' for apngs, and I don't see another reasonable way of getting that information (or num_frames, which is what I really want), so I won't add apngs yet. Again, if you discover a python library that can figure this stuff out, or if FFMPEG learns to parse them better, then I'll try again.