W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-fxtf-archive@w3.org > April 2017

Re: [fxtf-drafts] Luminance masking is slower than alpha masking

From: Amelia Bellamy-Royds via GitHub <sysbot+gh@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2017 00:54:43 +0000
To: public-fxtf-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <issue_comment.created-298136552-1493427281-sysbot+gh@w3.org>
@jrmuizel The use case for JPEG is that it is usually a smaller file size for representing photographic image, and it has better browser support than similar formats with alpha channels.

Also, you may be re-using images that you're using elsewhere in the design.  Being able to use the luminance mask can in some cases remove the need to create dedicated image assets for the mask.  This will be even more true when the `filter(<image>)` function is supported, so you can adjust contrast/brightness dynamically in the browser.

For @mstange's question: Last I checked Firefox was the only one that has shipped mask-image un-prefixed. `-webkit-mask-image` doesn't include luminance masking.

GitHub Notification of comment by AmeliaBR
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/fxtf-drafts/issues/137#issuecomment-298136552 using your GitHub account
Received on Saturday, 29 April 2017 00:54:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 20 November 2018 00:45:58 UTC