Is this happening because people are screenshotting images? Fundamentally misunderstanding the reason for the background? It’s maddening
It’s probably a combo of a lot of things, like screenshotting, encoding issues, accidental conversion, etc, but at least for sites that advertise themselves as image repositories, I’m pretty sure it’s to get you to actually visit the site. I’ve run into sites where the real image actually costs money to download, and ones where it’s free and they’re probably hoping for ad revenue from the page view.
Maybe people just appreciate the style. Like kids buying VHS tapes and watching movies in “full screen” pan and scan. They think the bug was the feature.
EVERY. SINGLE. FUCKING. TIME.
FFS figure out how to filter this shit Google.
In GIMP, use the magic select tool to select the colors in the background and delete them. Your milage may vary depending on partial transparency in the foreground, and anti-aliasing (on any part of the image).
That is so not the point, I shall congratulate you on your shitcomment.
Oh sorry I wasn’t awake yet. Thought you said “I need to google how to fix this shit”
If I explicitly search for a transparent background image, there should not need to be any further filtering needed. That’s just like, my opinion, man.
Google has had a transparent image filter for decades
I’m convinced it’s mostly one or two jerks with time on their hands doing this for the lulz. Seems like the search engines should be able to identify if there is a transparent layer or not and indicate this.
Gotta make sure it’s rendered the same on IE5 still.
You might want to consider trauma therapy.
first, with what money and second, they’ll be retired before i make it to the top of their waiting list, so third why?
- healthcare providers’
- Fair point
- So IE5 stops haunting you/them
I’m sorry I wasn’t completely transparent with you 😉
Fair fair, very important. What’s also important is that we get our prostate checked, and/or get some mammograms done.
wait.
waitwaitwait.
i always merge my layers before saving, but is this why the jpegs with transparency work on websites but the pings don’t? TIL. this is valuable shitposting news. I gotta switch over to pings exclusively
JPGs don’t support transparency. Has to be PNG or GIF. WEBP also supports transparency, but it’s got horrible compatibility with editors. There are other options that are overlooked for web like SVG, fantastic for a companies website logo.
Not sure what you are using. In Photoshop do not flatten the image. The program has a “save for web” and you can toggle transparency on and off. Better control than the “save as” and I think “save for screens”.
i was using gimp, but then i moved to paint dot net. i refuse to learn it well because shitposts aren’t supposed to look good and i’m in the “cut the magazine with scissors and glue it together to make a collage” era of photoshop luddism.
GIMPs got something like that using a plugin. Haven’t used it myself. But heard it does the trick.
https://templatetoaster.com/tutorials/gimp-save-for-web/
I’ve taught this technical junk of print and web to graphic designers for close to 20 years. Trust me when I say not a lot of people understand the nuances and it’s getting worse not better.
Not anyone’s fault really a lot of this his hidden behind the scenes and you have to seek it out and actually care. Which doesn’t come up often, until you need to optimize a websites load speed or print something extremely precise.
pho to shop luddism.
emphasis on the F
Search tumblr. They have all the real transparent pngs for some reason.
